Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 32203 (CAL)

MOUSUMI DUTTA v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (A)/2653/2026 · 2026-08-20

Tirthankar Ghosh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

20.08.2026 Serial no. 589 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court) CRM (A) 2653 of 2026 In re : An Application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023/under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with Durgapur PS Case No. 363 of 2026 dated 04.07.2026 u/s 126(2)/115(2)/117(2)/118(2)/109/351(2)/74/3(5) of the BNS. -And- In the matter of : Mousumi Dutta … Petitioner(s) Mr. Sekhar Kumar Basu, Sr Adv. Mr. Soubhik Mitter Ms. Rajnandini Das Mr. Karan Bapuli … for the petitioner(s) Ms. R. V. Kundalia Ms. Madhumita Sadhukhan … for the State-respondent(s) Ms. Bina Baidya … for the defacto-complainant Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a lady who has been foisted with the criminal case over political and local issues. State has produced the case diary and referred to the injury reports. The attention of this court has been drawn to the evidence of the eyewitness. Learned advocate for the defacto-complainant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. 2 I have taken into account the statement of the eyewitness which reflects the name of another accused Megnath Saha who inflicted injuries on the victim. So far as the present petitioner is concerned, she was definitely present at the spot but overt acts are not attributed to the present petitioner. Having considered the same, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present petitioner. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is Allowed. Accordingly, I direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioner [Mousumi Dutta] be released on anticipatory bail subject to the satisfaction of the arresting officer of the case and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and/or under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. As the investigation of the case is still in progress, the petitioner shall meet with the Investigating Officer of the case as and when she would be required by the I.O. of the case. Accordingly, CRM (A) 2653 of 2026 is disposed of. Memo of evidence submitted be kept with the record. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.) 3