Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2347/2026 of MUSARAF KHAN Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 27 August 2026
Sl. No. 34 Ct. No. 446 SG [REJECTED] C. R. M. ( A ) 2347 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with G.R. Cae No. 303 of 2026 arising out of Garhbeta Police Station Case No. 283/2026 dated 18.06.2026
27.08.2026
Sl. No. 34
Ct. No. 446
SG
[REJECTED]
C. R. M. (A) 2347 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with G.R. Cae No. 303 of 2026 arising out of Garhbeta Police Station Case No.
283/2026 dated 18.06.2026 under Sections 85/115(2)/109/351(2)/3(5)
of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
And
In Re: Musaraf Khan.
… … Petitioner
Mr. Amit Ranjan Pati,
Mr. Nilangsu Samanta,
Ms. Swastika, Chowdhury,
Ms. Ilika Nag,
Mr. Avijit Chatterjee.
… … for the petitioner
Mr. Subrata 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 appearing for the petitioner submits that, following the normal wear and tear of the marital life of the present petitioner and his wife, a dispute cropped up, which led to the registration of the present case. He submits that the other co-accused persons are on bail and, in such circumstances, according to him, the petitioner may be granted pre-arrest bail.
2. Learned Advocate appearing for the State produces the case diary and vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of the petitioner. He submits that the present petitioner is the husband of the complainant. The petitioner subjected the victim to physical and mental torture and even tried to kill her by hanging her. It would be evident from the injury report that the victim suffered injuries on her neck.
3. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the case diary and other materials on record,
2 including the injury report and the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS. Certain incriminating materials are available against the present petitioner. In view thereof, it would not be apposite to extend the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS in favour of the petitioner.
4. Accordingly, application for anticipatory bail stands rejected.
(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)