AD 16 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA March 25, 2026 Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Ct. 6 Appellate Side ssi CRM(A) 102 of 2026 An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Dinhata P.S. Case No.70 of 2024 dated 03.02.2024 under Sections 447/427/435/295/34 of the Indian Penal Code. And In the matter of: Majidul Khandakar & others. … petitioners Mr. Sudip Guha Ms. Ankita Nag … for the petitioners Mr. Tapan Bhattacharjee Mr. Dhiman Sil … for the State Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows. The petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. There is a political overtone in the allegations. Charge sheet has already been submitted. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. However, he submits that the CCTV footages that were referred was checked, but not collected. In the CCTV footages, there were only some motorbikes seen. Therefore, the I.O. did not think it fit to collect the CCTV footages. He refers to the statements of the witnesses and the seizure list of broken articles. 2 The allegations are of destroying idols of deities, among other things. It is indeed very surprising that although some motorbikes were allegedly seen in the CCTV footages, the numbers for such motorbikes were not checked or worked out and the CCTV footages were not seized as corroborative evidence. Be that as it may, considering the incriminating materials available in the case diary including the statements of all the witnesses present at page 21, 22 and 23 and the seizure list, I do not consider this is to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Jay Sengupta, J.)