Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10409 (CAL)

LIPIKA PRADHAN AND ANR. v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (A)/1084/2026 · 2026-04-27

Jay Sengupta

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

AD 42 April 27, 2026 Ct. 28 SG CRM(A) 1084 of 2026 Partly Allowed An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kharagpur Local P.S. Case No.254 of 2026 dated 16.03.2026 under Sections 115(2)/117(2)/109(1)/3(5) of the BNS. And In the matter of:Lipika Pradhan and another … petitioners Mr. Asim Kumar Chakraborti … for the petitioners Mr. Arindam Sen Ms. Suchismita Dutta … for the State Report filed by the State is taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are absolutely innocent. They have been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail, relies on the report and submits that Jhuma Prodhan and Lipika Pradhan are one and the same person. He refers to the injury report which shows a lacerated injury inflicted on the scalp. It is specifically mentioned in the injury report that the petitioner No.1 had assaulted the alleged victim on the head with a cricket bat. Considering the above, the other materials available in the case diary and the alleged role ascribed to each of the present petitioners, while I am inclined to grant anticipatory 2 bail to the petitioner No.2, the application for anticipatory bail of the petitioner No.1 (Lipika Pradhan) is rejected. In the event of arrest, the petitioner No.2 (Sraban Pradhan) shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and also be subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023 and on the further conditions that the petitioner No.2 shall cooperate with the investigation, shall meet the investigating officer once a week till submission of report in final form and shall not threaten or intimidate witnesses. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of requisite formalities. (Jay Sengupta, J.)