08.04.2025 Court No.28 Item No.24 tbsr Rejected CRM (A) 1140 of 2025 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Balagarh P.S. Case No.86 of 2025 dated 22.02.2025 under Sections 115(2)/329(4)/117(2)/109/76/351(3)/79/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. And In the matter of: Kartick Sardar & Anr. ….Petitioners. Mr. Prasenjit Debnath Mrs. Punam Basu Ms. Sayani Pan …for the petitioners. Md. Anwar Hossain Ms. Puja Goswami …..for State Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows. The de facto complainant of this case is the petitioner no. 1’s wife’s brother’s wife. All of these persons are neighbours. A scuffle took place on a particular day, which resulted injuries on both sides. Before the instant case could be registered the petitioners lodged a complaint, which who were not registered as an FIR. Four other co- accused who were similarly circumstanced was granted by the anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. From the injury report annexed on behalf of the petitioners, it appears that the petitioner no. 1 was in an inebriated condition when he was receiving medical treatment. This corroborates the allegations made by the de facto complainant at least about the fact that he was in such condition when the incident took place. 2 There are serious allegations of assault committed on vital body parts of the victim. A co-accused had even throttled a two year old child in course of the attack. In view of the materials available against the petitioners in the case diary, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present petitioners. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Jay Sengupta, J.)