Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2183/2026 of XXXXXX Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 21 August 2026
Sl. No.19 Ct. 446/tkm C. R. M. ( A ) 2183 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Baishnabnagar Police Station Case No.1529 of 2025 dated 17.11.2025 under sections 179/180/61(2) of BNS 2023 And In
21.08.2026
Sl. No.19
Ct. 446/tkm
C. R. M. (A) 2183 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Baishnabnagar Police Station Case No.1529 of 2025 dated 17.11.2025
under sections 179/180/61(2) of BNS 2023
And
In Re: XXX
… … Petitioner
Mr. Sayan Mukherjee
Mr. Amanul Islam
Mr. Mehedi Masud
Ms. R Bhadra
… … for the petitioner
Ms. Supriti Sarkar
… … 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 there is a long- standing civil dispute between the petitioner and the family members of the de facto complainant. Due to personal grudge, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the civil dispute has been given a criminal colour. The charge sheet in this case has already been submitted. He, therefore, prays for pre- arrest bail.
2. Learned Advocate for the State produces the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of the petitioner on the basis of materials available therein.
3. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties and perused the materials on record, including the statements of the witnesses recorded in the course of investigation, the medical report, and the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS. Undisputedly, the charge sheet has been submitted; however, certain incriminating materials are available in the case diary and liberty has been reserved by the concerned
2 I.O. to file a supplementary affidavit. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the offence and the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that it would not be proper to extend the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS in favour of the petitioner.
4. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)