20.08.2026 Sl.No. 4 Ct. 39 Allowed Amalranjan In The High Court At Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side CRM (A) No. 2087 of 2026 In Re: An application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/corresponding to under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; filed in connection with Kotwali Police Station Case No. 323 of 2026 dated 25.03.2026 under Sections 124(2)/61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. -And- In the matter of : Ruma Mahanto & Ors. … Petitioners Ms. Kaberi Ray ….for the petitioners Mr. Prantik Sarkar ……..for the State 1. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioner no. 1 (mother of the accused, Iman Mohanta), the petitioner no. 2 (grand- mother of the accused) and the petitioner no. 3 (maternal-aunt of the accused) are innocent. They have been falsely implicated in this case and they did not participate in the alleged offence. He prays for anticipatory bail on any terms and conditions. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State produces the case diary as well as the memo of evidence and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the present petitioners stating that they are also involved in 2 the alleged offences. He also relies on the statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS of the victim. 3. Memo of evidence, filed by the State, is taken on record. 4. Having heard the learned counsels for the respective parties and on perusal of the materials available on record as well as the case diary, including the statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS of the victim and the injury report, it appears that the victim suffered a black spot over the forearms and no other injuries are noted by the Doctor. The present petitioners were not present at the spot when the alleged offence was committed by the other accused persons. One of the co- accused persons has already been granted bail by the Juvenile Justice Board. So far as the petitioners are concerned, this court finds that the statement record under Section 183 of the BNSS is weak against the present petitioners. In view of the overall facts and circumstances, this court is of the opinion that this is a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners as there is no need for custodial interrogation/detention. 5. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners, namely, 1. Ruma Mahanto, 2. Manu Sardar @ Manu Sardar Nath and 3. Jhuma Saha are allowed. 6. In the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on the terms and conditions as he deems fit and proper and 3 also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 7. In the event the petitioners fail to comply with any of the conditions mentioned above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to pray for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted by this Court in accordance with law. 8. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. 9. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court. 10. Concerned Department is directed to supply certified copies of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. ( Ajay Kumar Gupta, J. )