SOIADA BIBI ALIAS SAYEDA BIBI v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.
WPA/16709/2026 · 2026-07-27
Saugata Bhattacharyya
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 30708 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 30708 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
25 2277..0077..22002266 Ct. No. 05
adeb
WPA 16709 of 2026
Soiada Bibi alias Sayeda Bibi Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Arindam Chatterjee Ms. Lipika Chatterjee Mr. Soumik Dey Ms. Rika Das
…for the petitioner Mr. Soumik Ganguly
..for the respondent nos. 6 & 7 Mr. Deb Kumar Chandra Ms. Megha Sarkar
…for the State
1. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.
2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that certain materials are required to be seized by the investigating officer while investigating Nalhati Police Station case No. 307 of 2026 dated 16th June, 2026 under certain provisions of BNS. It is also submitted that accused persons after being enlarged on bail are threatening the petitioner. Prayer is made in this writ petition for directing the concerned police authorities to take necessary steps for taking investigation to its logical conclusion at an early date.
2
3. State respondents and respondent nos. 6 and 7 are represented by learned advocates.
4. If petitioner is aggrieved by inaction on the part of the police authorities in taking necessary steps thereby seizing items in that event petitioner needs to approach jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS 2023. High Court while exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not an appropriate forum for giving direction upon the concerned police authorities/investigating agency to take steps in connection with investigation at the first instance, unless exigencies demand otherwise. In this regard reliance is placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 2026 SCC OnLine SC 798 (Sujal Vishwas Attavar and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
5. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that accused persons being enlarged on bail are posing threat to the petitioner. If petitioner is being threatened by accused persons after being released on bail in that event it will be open to the petitioner to take steps in accordance with law for cancellation of bail.
3
6. With the aforesaid observation writ petition stands disposed of.
7. Parties to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)