AD 6 November 13, 2025 Ct. 28 SG CRM(A) 2704 of 2025 Reject An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Ratua Police Station Case No.343 of 2025 dated 05.05.2025 under Sections 318(4), 316(2), added Sections 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of the BNS. And In the matter of: Md Anarul Hoque @ Anowarul Haque … petitioner Mr. Ayan Bhattacharjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sagar Saha … for the petitioner Mr. Rudradipta Nandy, ld. APP Mr. Aniket Mitra Mr. Bikram Mitra … for the State Learned senior counsel representing the petitioner submits that there is a scheme known as “Aikashree” for the benefit of students belonging to the minority community. It provides scholarships to pre-matric, post-matric students and students of technical and professional courses. The petitioner is only the Teacher-in-Charge of the educational institute in question. As per the notification dated 20.06.2019, there has to be a nodal officer for each school who is to deal with the applications and verify them. There is no indication that the petitioner was a nodal officer for such purpose. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail, relies on the case diary and submits that 2 about 14,000 students received grants. These were segregated into three groups. For the pre-matric and matric students, the grants used to be lesser. That is why the offences were primarily committed in respect of grants for professional and technical courses. KYC has been collected for all the grantees. It has been found that some of the beneficiaries were 50 years old and 60 years old. Their statements have been recorded and some of the photographs of the grantees have been taken. It appears that a list was prepared and forwarded by the present petitioner as the Teacher-in-Charge of the institution. Once such money was received by the non-eligible grantees, the same were taken out and a substantial portion was taken by the petitioner. Total disbursed amount was Rs.12.91 crores between the years 2021 to 24. Genuine benefits received were to the tune of about Rs.2.92 crores. The rest of the amount of Rs.9.99 crores was embezzled by the accused. Considering the above and the other incriminating materials available in the case diary, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, rejected. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of requisite formalities. (Jay Sengupta, J.)