Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2188/2026 of ARJUN MALIK AND ORS. Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 18 August 2026
Sl. No. 38 Ct. No. 446 SG [ALLOWED] C. R. M. ( A ) 2188 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Dadpur Police Station Case No. 186/2026 dated 11.06.2026 under Sections 85/ 115(2)/ 318(2)/ 109/ 76/
18.08.2026
Sl. No. 38
Ct. No. 446
SG
[ALLOWED]
C. R. M. (A) 2188 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Dadpur Police Station Case No.
dated
11.06.2026 under Sections 85/ 115(2)/ 318(2)/ 109/ 76/ 315 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (G.R. Case No. 1978 of
2026).
And
In Re: Arjun Malik & Ors.
… … Petitioners
Mr. Tapan Dutta Gupta,
Mr. Parvej Anam,
Mr. Keshab Chandra Das,
Ms. Aparajita Mandal.
… for the petitioners
Mr. Amal Kr. Dutta,
Ms. Nabanita Chatterjee.
… 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 petitioners submits that, although the present case has been initiated by the complainant under Section 85 of the BNS and other provisions thereof, the husband has not been made an accused. Her parents-in-law and other family members have been made accused out of personal grudge and with a view to exert pressure upon them. He submits that the nature of the allegations is omnibus and there is no specific allegation against the present accused persons. He submits that, in such circumstances, it would not be apposite to curtail the personal liberty of the present petitioners and, as such, according to him the petitioners are entitled to the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS.
2. Learned Advocate appearing 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 case diary and other materials available on record, including the injury report. In the FIR, it was alleged that the victim had suffered an injury from a bite on her back. However, the injury report does not lend any support to such allegation made against the present accused persons. The incident allegedly occurred in the presence of direct evidence, and there is no material demonstrating the need for custodial interrogation of the present petitioners. In view thereof, I am of the view that the privilege under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioners.
4. In view of the above, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
5. Accordingly, I direct that, in the event of arrest, the petitioners, viz., (1) Arjun Malik, (2) Subir Malik, (3) Indrajit Ghosh @ Indrajit Mall and (4) Kachhi Patra @ Tripti Patra be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- each, with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chinsurah, Hooghly 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.)