29.10.2025 Item No.62. Daily List Court No.42 Srimanta/Mithun IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA. CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CRM (A) 3273 of 2025 In re : An Application Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 -And- In the matter of : Jitendra Routh … … Petitioner Mr. Rajdeep Mazumder, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pritam Roy, Ms. Triparna Roy … … For the Petitioner Mr. Suman De, Ms. Baishakhi Chatterjee … …For the State Written instruction captioned as “Grounds For Opposing Bail”, as filed on behalf of the State, is taken on record. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The complainant’s brother had a scuffle with a tea stall owner over a certain dues. The petitioner had only intervened. In the process the victim succumbed to his injuries. There is no element of SC and ST (POA) Act in the instant case. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He refers to the statement of the witnesses including an injured witness who had given a statement before a Magistrate. He also submits that provisions of Section 3 of the SC and ST (POA) Act have been clearly made 2 out and, therefore, the prayer for anticipatory bail is not maintainable. He also submits that the present petitioner had been declared as a proclaimed offender. On this score as well, the prayer for anticipatory bail application would not lie. Considering the incriminating materials available in the case diary and the fact that the charges contain provision of SC and ST (POA) Act and the further fact that the petitioner has been declared a proclaimed offender, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting an anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. Urgent Photostat certified copies of this order may be delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all formalities. (Jay Sengupta, J.)