Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/253/2026 of ANSAR ALI @ ANCHAR ALI AND ANR Vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 17 August 2026
Court No.09. (S.Mandi) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH
08 17.08.2026
Court
No.09. (S.Mandi)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI
APPELLATE SIDE
CRM(M)/253/2026
In Re: - An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kotwali Police Station Case No.199
of dated
05-05-2026
under
Sections
126(2)/115(2)/118(2)/109/324(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- And -
In the matter of: - ANSAR ALI @ ANCHAR ALI AND ANR
..…petitioners.
Mr. Bikash Singha
Mr. Aniruddha Tarafdar
…for the petitioners.
Mr. Avrojyoti Das, Ld. APP
Mr. Bijay Bikram Das
Mr. Arko 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 Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case due to a political rivalry. Although, the petitioner no. 1 was named in the FIR, but there was no mention of his role in committing the alleged crime of assault. The petitioner no. 2 was even not named in the FIR.
2. Learned Counsel has further submitted that the present petitioners are standing on the same footing with some other accused persons who are granted anticipatory bail by the Hon’ble Court and further they are also standing on the same footing with the accused Subhas Das, who was granted bail on 28.07.2026.
3. The learned Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail. According to him, there is sufficient incriminating evidence. The investigation is not complete. The principal accused is still absconding.
4. I have gone through the materials on record. It appears that the petitioner no. 2 is standing on the same footing with the accused Md. Abu Jaher who was granted bail on 28.07.2026. It further appears that although the petitioner no. 01 is named in the FIR, no allegation of overt act was mentioned in the FIR. However, the petitioners are in custody for more than 79 days. The investigation has progressed to a great extent.
5. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioners for bail is allowed on the following conditions:-
a) The petitioners, namely, Ansar Ali @ Anchar Ali and Bulbul Rahaman, shall be released on bail upon furnishing bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each, with two sureties of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalpaiguri.
b) The petitioner no. 1 shall meet the I/C, Kotwali P.S. once in a week until further order and the petitioner no. 2 shall meet the I/C, Mal Police Station once in a week, until further orders.
c) The petitioners shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every date of hearing and/or as and when to be directed by the Court.
d) The petitioners shall not intimate or threaten the witnesses and/or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever and shall not commit any cognizable offence in any manner whatsoever.
e) The petitioners shall remain within the geographical limits of the District Jalpaiguri, until further orders.
6. In the event, the petitioners fail to adhere to any of the conditions stipulated above, the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail in accordance with law.
7. The application for bail is, thus, allowed.
8. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)