21.08.2026 Sl.No. 6 Ct. 39 Rejected Amalranjan In The High Court At Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side CRM (A) No. 1924 of 2026 In Re: An application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; filed in connection with Rampurhat Police Station Case No. 514 of 2025 dated 16.09.2025 under Sections 85/89/109(1)/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act corresponding to GR case no. 2270 of 2025. -And- In the matter of : Saidul Khan … Petitioner Mr. Bitasok Banerjee Ms. Debangana Bhattacharya ….for the petitioner Mr. Sandip Prasad Shaw ……..for the State 1. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the wife of the petitioner left the matrimonial home on 28.08.2025 and started residing in her paternal house. However, she lodged a complaint alleging that the petitioner assaulted her on 07.09.2025. A copy of the notice issued by M.M.R. & Kazi has been filed by the petitioner to show that she has already given divorce under Muslim Marriage Act. Other co-accused persons 2 have already been granted anticipatory bail. 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 petitioner relying upon injury report and the statement recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS, 2023. 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 case diary produced by the State including the statement recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS as well as the injury report, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present petitioner as there are sufficient materials against the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the present petitioner is rejected. 6. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court. 7. 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. )