09.06.2026 Sl. No.39 NB CRM (A) 1399 of 2026 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Samsherganj PS Case No.1002/2025 dated 25.10.2025 under Sections 126(2)/117(2)/118(2)/109(1)/324(4)/351(2)/303(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. And In the matter of: Sadek Sk & Ors. … petitioners Dr. Achin Jana, Mr. Prosenjit Ghosh, Ms. Chetna Rustagi, Mr. Debojyoti Kumar, Ms. Darothy Mukherjee. …for the petitioners. Mr. Krishnendu Bhattacharya, Mr. Somnath Adhikary. ….for the State. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows. Two groups of men fought with each other. Injuries were suffered on both sides. There are case and counter case. The first case was instituted from the side of the petitioners. Although the petitioners’ application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, later on, upon compromise, the learned Sessions Judge allowed the application for anticipatory bail to some other accused. The petitioners stand on the same footing. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the case diary and strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that the main victim suffered multiple haemorrhagic contusions in right parieto temporal region with perilesional oedema. Effectively, there were fracture and contusions. The other victim also 2 suffered some other injury. The petitioners have been specifically named by the injured victim and the other eye-witnesses. 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 to the present petitioners. The application for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is, thus, 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.)