Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2354/2026 of SADHAN GHOSH Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 27 August 2026
Sl. No. 40 Ct. No. 446 SG [ALLOWED] C. R. M. ( A ) 2354 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Hanskhali Police Station Case No. 43/2026 dated 21.01.2026 under Section 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
27.08.2026
Sl. No. 40
Ct. No. 446
SG
[ALLOWED]
C. R. M. (A) 2354 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Hanskhali Police Station Case No. 43/2026 dated 21.01.2026 under Section 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
And
In Re: Sadhan Ghosh.
… … Petitioner
Mr. Subir Ganguly,
Mr. Sankar Halder.
…for the petitioner
Mr. Anindya Ghosh,
Ms. Anindita Mukherjee
… for the State
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the principal accused is on bail and that, in the FIR, it is alleged that the petitioner is a henchman of the principal accused. He submits that, taking note of the aforesaid, the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioner.
2. Learned Advocate appearing for the State produces the case diary and memorandum of evidence and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that, despite receipt of notice, the petitioner did not comply with the terms of the notice issued to him under Section 35(3) of the BNSS.
3. This contention is vehemently opposed by the learned Advocate for the petitioner, who submits that, on one occasion, the notice was served upon the petitioner after the date was fixed for his appearance before the concerned Investigating Officer, and, on another occasion, the notice was served when the petitioner was seriously ill and had been
2 advised to take rest. For this reason, the petitioner could not comply with the instructions contained in the notice.
4. Heard learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the case diary and other materials on record. The investigation has proceeded fairly, and the principal accused is on bail. The petitioner has roots in society, and there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence. Considering all these aspects, I am of the view that the privilege under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioner.
5. In view of the above, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
6. Accordingly, I direct that, in the event of arrest, the petitioner, viz. Sadhan Ghosh, be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/-, with two sureties of the like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranaghat, Nadia, and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
7. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.
(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)