Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2195/2026 of SULTANA BEGUM Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 21 August 2026
Sl. No.23 Ct. 446/tkm C. R. M. ( A ) 2195 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with West Port Police Station Case No.53 of 2026 dated 07.06.2026 under sections 308(5) of the BNS 2023 And In Re:
21.08.2026
Sl. No.23
Ct. 446/tkm
C. R. M. (A) 2195 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with West Port Police Station Case No.53 of 2026 dated 07.06.2026 under sections 308(5) of the BNS 2023
And
In Re: Sultana Begum
… … Petitioner
Allowed
Mr. Soumya Nag
Mr. Rajdeep Sengupta
… … for the petitioner
Ms. Deboyoti Adhikary
Ms. Nupur Chaudhuri
… … 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. Mr. Nag, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is a member of a political party and had actively participated in a political campaign organised by the said party. According to him, such participation enraged the petitioner’s political rivals and, as a consequence of the ensuing political rivalry and personal grudge, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He accordingly prays for pre-arrest bail on behalf of the petitioner.
2. Mr. Adhikary, learned advocate for the State produces the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
3. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the materials on record. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering that the incident occurred in the presence of direct evidence and that there is no material demonstrating the need for custodial interrogation of the petitioner, I am of the view that the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioner.
2
4. Accordingly, I direct that, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned CJM Alipore, South 24 Pgs. and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
5. The application being CRM (A) 2195 of 2026 is disposed of.
(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)