Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 28881 (CAL)

PETITIONER NO. 1 AND ANR. v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (A)/1764/2026 · 2026-07-20

Tirthankar Ghosh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

D/L930 20.07.2026 Bpg. Allowed C.R.M. (A) 1764 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Balagarh Police Station Case No.195 of 2026 dated 16.04.2026 under Sections 137(2)/140(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and adding Section 64(2)(m) 61(1) 351(2)/3(5) of BNS ; Petitioner no.1 & Anr. Versus The State of West Bengal & Anr Mr. Pratik Banerjee Mr. Prasanta Banerjee Mrs. Ratna Das. …for the petitioners. Mr. Suman Chakraborty. …for the State. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation of the case and submits because of other disputes, petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. I have taken into account the statement of the victim lady under Section 183 of the BNSS as well as the other papers appearing in the case diary. Having considered the same, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the present petitioners are not warranted 2 in the facts of the present case. As such, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail 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 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Since the investigation of the case is in progress, petitioners shall meet with the investigating officer of the case once in every 10 days till the charge-sheet is submitted before the jurisdictional court. Accordingly, CRM(A)1764 of 2026 is allowed. Memo of Evidence submitted by the State be kept with the record. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)