24.08.2026 Serial no. 26 Anticipatory Bail [Allowed] Dd IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRImINAL mIsCELLANEOUs jURIsdICTION AppELLATE sIdE CRM (A)/2502/2026 In re : An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Sutahata Police Station Case No. 199 of 2026 dated June 07, 2026 under Sections 316(2)/318(4)/ 115(2)/ 351(2)/ 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 with Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, goving rise to GR Case No. 1266/2026 pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Haldia at Purba Midnapore. -And- In the matter of : Sudarshan Jana & Ors. … … Petitioners Mr. Navanil De , Advocate Mr. Subhrajit Dey, Advocate … … For the Petitioners Mr. Brajesh Jha, APP Mr. Subrata Mukherjee, Advocate … …For the State 1. Upon hearing the learned advocate for the petitioners as well as the learned advocate for the State and also upon going through the materials in the case diary, it transpires that the petitioners and other accused persons are alleged to have dishonestly induced the de facto complainant and other local persons to part with money on different false assurances. The First Information Report contained in the case diary records the details of such money which were received by the present petitioners from different persons on the basis of assurances given to them. 2. Learned advocate for the State has submitted that from the statements recorded under Section 183 of BNSS as well as under Section 180 thereof, it transpires that the present 2 petitioners are alleged to have extorted money from different persons including the de facto complainant. According to the case made out by the prosecution, the offence of such extortion was committed in the year 2024. There is nothing in the case diary that any contemporaneous complaint was lodged by the de facto complainant or any other person who was allegedly duped with. Learned advocate for the State relies upon an alleged bill raised by one of such persons in the year 2025. It is alleged that such materials were taken by the petitioners but never paid. 3. No firearms appear to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioners. Moreover, one accused person was arrested in connection with the instance case. 4. From the aforesaid facts of the case, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. 5. Accordingly, I direct that in the event of arrest the petitioners shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each, with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and also be subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and on further condition that the petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer once in a fortnight till the conclusion of the investigation and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear on every date before the jurisdictional Court on and from the date fixed for appearance of the accused and in default the jurisdictional Court will pass appropriate order to secure the presence of the petitioners in Court including cancelling the anticipatory bail granted without further reference to this Court. 6. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. 3 7. CRM (A)/2502/2026 is disposed of. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.) DEBABRATA DAS Digitally signed by DEBABRATA DAS Date: 2026.08.24 17:26:22 +05'30'