Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2224/2026 of SAYAN GUPTA @ SUVA GUPTA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 17 August 2026
Sl. No. 57 Ct. No. 446 SG [ALLOWED] C. R. M. ( A ) 2224 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Burdwan Sadar Police Station Case No. 599/2026 dated 22.05.2026 under Sections 341/ 323/ 325/ 326/
17.08.2026
Sl. No. 57
Ct. No. 446
SG
[ALLOWED]
C. R. M. (A) 2224 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Burdwan Sadar Police Station Case No. 599/2026 dated 22.05.2026 under Sections 341/ 323/ 325/ 326/ 307/ 384/
387/354B/379/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 2023.
And
In Re: Sayan Gupta @ Suva Gupta.
… … Petitioner
Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay.
… … for the petitioner
Ms. Shalu Gupta.
… … 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 the complaint giving rise to this case was lodged almost five years after the date of the alleged incident. He submits that, in the FIR, it is alleged that the incident occurred on 9th May, 2021, whereas the FIR was lodged on 22nd May, 2026. He submits that the delay has not been satisfactorily explained and that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case out of political rivalry and personal grudge. He submits that, in the circumstances of the case, it would be inappropriate to compel the petitioner to remain in custody and to curtail his personal liberty.
2. Learned Advocate appearing for the State produces the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the present petitioner. She submits that the present petitioner is an influential person and threatened the de facto complainant with
2 consequences in the event any complaint was lodged before any authority regarding the incident. She submits that, taking note of this situation, the present application be rejected.
3. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the case diary and other materials on record. Undisputedly, in the FIR, it is alleged that the incident occurred on 9th May, 2021, whereas the FIR was lodged on 22nd May, 2026. The delay has not been explained at all. The incident allegedly occurred in the presence of direct evidence. In view thereof, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary and that the privilege 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., Sayan Gupta @ Suva Gupta 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan, Purba Bardhaman 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.)