Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1083 (CAL)

HANIF MALLICK AND ANR. v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (A)/450/2026 · 2026-02-24

Jay Sengupta

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

24.02.2026 Court No.28 Item No.31 ssi CRM (A) 450 of 2026 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Suraksha Nagarik Sanhita in connection with Mangalkote Police Station Case No. 54 of 2025 dated 13.02.2025 under Sections 189 (2)/126(2)/118(1)/117(2)/118(2)/109(1)/103(1)/61(2) of the BNS 2023. And In the matter of: Hanif Mallick @ Hanif Mallik & another. …. Petitioners Mr. Abhishek Chakraborty Mr. M. A. Shaikh …for the petitioners Mr. Suman Chakraborty …for the de facto Mr. Partha Pratim Das Ms. Kanchan Roy ..for the State Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows. The petitioners are being falsely implicated in this case. Charge sheet has already been submitted. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de facto complainant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that there are statements of witnesses that have clearly named the petitioners as some of the assailants. Proclamation and attachment have already been issued against the present petitioners. Considering the above, the other incriminating materials available in the case diary and the fact that proclamation and attachment have 2 already been issued against the present petitioners, I do not consider that this is to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected. (Jay Sengupta, J.)