28.07.2026 Item No.33 Court No.9 CHC (Allowed) Calcutta High Court In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Appellate Side C.R.M.(M) 203 of 2026 In Re:- An application for bail under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; in connection with Kotwali Police Station Case No.199 of 2026 dated 05.05.2026, under Sections 126(2)/115(2)/118(2)/109/324(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. And In the matter of : Md. Abu Jaher ...… petitioner Mr. Sudip Guha, Advocate Mr. S. Das, Advocate Ms. Ankita Nag, Advocate …for the petitioner Mr. Avrojyoti Das, Ld. A.P.P. Mr. Kallol Ghosh, Advocate Mr. Abhilash Mittal, Advocate …for the State 1. Bail prayer of the petitioner is taken up for consideration. 2. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that petitioner has been in custody for 82 days i.e. since May 6, 2026. The investigation of the case is still ongoing and has not concluded yet. Learned advocate for the petitioner also submits that the case was filed due to the political vendetta. No specific role has been ascribed to the present petitioner in the incident. He further submits that one of the coaccused has already been granted anticipatory bail by an order passed on June 30, 2026 in CRM (A) 389 of 2026 (In the matter of : Rajesh Lakra). 2 The case of the petitioner stands on better footing than that of the accused Rajesh Lakra who was granted anticipatory bail. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not named in the First Information Report. He has been subsequently arrested in connection with the case. 3. Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail. He relies upon various materials in the Case Diary including the Statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS. He also relies upon the statement of other witnesses recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS. Learned advocate for the State refers to the injury report. The case relates to offence of inflicting grievous injury by dangerous weapon. Learned advocate for the State also submits that the case also involves the provisions of the Arms Act. 4. As it transpires from the materials on record that an FIR was lodged against 37 accused persons. The petitioner was not named in such FIR. There were allegations of inflicting injuries by different weapons. One of the accused is alleged to have assaulted the victim by a sharp cutting weapon. The materials in the Case Diary do not ascribe any specific overt act to the present petitioner, though, he was a member of an unlawful assembly, as evident from the materials in the Case Diary. The investigation of the case has not yet concluded. 3 Chargesheet is yet to be submitted. The petitioner has been in custody for 82 days. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature of injuries, as also the role ascribed to the present petitioner and also taking into account the period of custody undergone by the present petitioner, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Consequently, prayer for bail of the petitioner is granted. 7. Accordingly, I direct that the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalpaiguri, subject to condition that the petitioner shall appear before the trial court on every date of hearing until further orders and shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever. 8. In the event petitioner fails to appear before the trial court without any justifiable cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court. 9. CRM(M) 203 of 2026 is disposed of. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)