Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2206/2026 of ARCHANA DAS @ GANGA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 21 August 2026
Sl. No. 28 Ct. No. 446 SG [ALLOWED] C. R. M. ( A ) 2206 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Ramnagar Police Station Case No. 16/2026 dated 13.01.2026 under Sections 85/108/61(2) of the
21.08.2026
Sl. No. 28
Ct. No. 446
SG
[ALLOWED]
C. R. M. (A) 2206 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Ramnagar Police Station Case No. 16/2026 dated 13.01.2026 under Sections 85/108/61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
And
In Re: Archana Das @ Ganga.
… … Petitioner
Mr. Debarshi Brahma,
Mr. Sayantan Maity.
… for the petitioner
Mr. Pritam Roy,
Ms. Jayashree Patra.
… 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. Brahma, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is not a relative of the victim and that no domestic relationship exists between the victim and the petitioner or the family members of the principal accused. The victim was employed at a shop run by the principal accused, namely, the victim’s husband. He submits that, out of grudge following the demise of the victim, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the husband and parents-in-law are on bail and that the charge sheet has been submitted. According to him, custodial interrogation of the present petitioner is not warranted.
2. Mr. Roy, learned advocate appearing for the State produces the case diary and memorandum of evidence and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of the petitioner.
3. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the case diary and other materials available on record. Admittedly, there was no domestic relationship between the
2 petitioner and the victim, and the petitioner is also not a family member of the victim. The charge sheet has been submitted. The principal accused and the parents-in-law of the victim are on bail. Taking note of these facts, I am of the view that the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioner.
4. In view of the above, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
5. Accordingly, I direct that, in the event of arrest, the petitioner, viz., Archana Das @ Ganga be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/-, with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Contai, Purba Medinipur and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
6. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.
(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)