20.08.2026 Item No.24 Court No.551 KS In The High Court at Calcutta Appellate Side CRM (A) 2477 of 2026 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Sainthia Police Station Case No.215 of 2026 dated 12.06.2026 under Sections 316(5)/ 318(4)/ 314/ 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to G.R. No.977/2026. And In the matter of : Prasanta Kumar Sadhu @ Jhokan Sadhu ...… Petitioner Mr. S. Mitter Mr. K. Bapuli .…For the Petitioner Mr. Somopriyo Chowdhury Mr. Supriyo Mahajan …..For the State 1. Having heard the learned advocate for the petitioner as well as learned advocate for the State and upon going through the materials in the Case Diary it appears that the petitioner happens to be the Sabhapati of the Panchayat Samity, Sainthia. As per the allegations made in the First Information Report, in such capacity, the petitioner kept 93 numbers of Tarpaulins earmarked for Disaster Management, Government of West Bengal, in his personal godown. 2 2. Learned advocate for the petitioner, at the time of hearing, denied the existence of such Tarpaulin in his godown. However, materials in the Case Diary goes to show that the concerned B.D.O. lodged a written complaint that such Tarpaulin was recovered from the godown belonging to the petitioner. Besides that it also transpires that the petitioner was served with notices, which were issued to appear before the concerned B.D.O. asking him to show cause as to how the Tarpaulin belonging to Disaster Management, Government of West Bengal was kept in the personal godown of the petitioner, however, the petitioner did not appear in pursuance of such notice. 3. Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that he had responded to such notice. 4. Learned advocate for the State submits that in spite of any response filed on behalf of the petitioner, no explanation for the presence of Government Tarpaulin, was offered by the petitioner. The materials in the Case Diary goes to show that the Tarpaulin was recovered from the godown belonging to the petitioner. An inventory was made, in this regard and subsequently, it was seized. 3 5. Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that in his response to notice given to him, he had expressed that the Tarpaulin belonging to Disaster Management Department, Government of West Bengal could have been distributed under the supervision of the B.D.O. himself. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. 7. Thus, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. 8. Accordingly, CRM (A) 2477 of 2026 stands dismissed. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)