AD 84 January 5, 2026 Ct. 28 SG CRM(A) 4231 of 2025 Reject An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kaliganj P.S. Case No.511 of 2025 dated 13.06.2025 under Sections 117(2)/118(2)/109/103(2) of the BNS, 2023. And In the matter of: Ramij Sk … petitioner Mr. Sumanta Das … for the petitioner Mr. Antarikhya Basu Ms. Madhumita Basak ... for the State Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some hunters were mistaken as thieves and there was a mob lynching. The petitioner was at best a bystander. Learned counsel for the State strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail, relies on the statements of witnesses and the post-mortem report and submits that from the CCTV footage, witnesses identified the present petitioner as one of the prime assailants. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Tehseen S. Poonawalia vs. Union of India reported at (2018) 9 SCC 501. Considering the above, the other incriminating materials available in the case diary and the alleged role ascribed to the present petitioner, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. 2 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.)