Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 32696 (CAL)

AMIRUL SK @ AMIRUL SEKH v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (A)/1993/2026 · 2026-08-18

Ajay Kumar Gupta

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

18.08.2026 Serial no. 14 [Srimanta] Ct. No. – 39 Rejected CRM (A) 1993 of 2026 In re : An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with PTN Case No. 385/2026 arising out of Katwa Police Station Case No. 107/2026 dated 25.02.2026 under Section 25(1b)(a) of the Arms Act pending before the Learned A.C.J.M., Katwa -And- In the matter of : AMIRUL SK. @ AMIRUL SEKH … … Petitioner Mr. Debapratim Guha, Mr. Diptendu Banerjee, Advocates … … For the Petitioner Mr. Koustav Lal Mukherjee, Advocate … …For the State 1. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the present petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case although the arms were recovered from his residence, when he was absent. He further submits that the alleged weapon, recovered from his residence, was not in his conscious possession. He prays for bail on any terms and conditions. 2. Learned Advocate appearing for the State produces the case diary and the report, which indicate that the petitioner has a previous antecedent on a similar offence. A charge- sheet has also been submitted against him being Charge- sheet No. 84/2021 dated 16.04.2021 under Sections 341/326/307/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3/4 of the E.S. Act. He finally opposes the anticipatory bail prayer. 2 3. Having heard the submission of the respective parties and on perusal of the materials on record as well as the case diary, this Court is of the opinion that the weapon was recovered from his residence and further the petitioner has a previous antecedent. Therefore, this is a fit case for custodial interrogation. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is considered and rejected. 4. The application for anticipatory bail being CRM(A) 1993 of 2026 is, thus, rejected. 5. All concerned parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 6. Criminal Section is directed to supply urgent certified copies of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)