Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 33550 (CAL)

AGRADIP GHOSH AND ANR. v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (A)/2445/2026 · 2026-08-19

Md Shabbar Rashidi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

19.08.2026 Court No.551 Item No.23 tbsr CRM (A) 2445 of 2026 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Chanchal P.S. Case No.407 of 2026 dated 07.05.2026 under Sections 126(2)/115(2)/124/109/303(2)/49 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhyita. And In the matter of: AGRADIP GHOSH AND ANR. ….Petitioners. Mr. Amal Krishna Samanta Mr. Subhas Jana Ms. Mohua Palit …for the petitioners. Mr. Somopriya Chadhury Mr. Anirudha Sarkar …..for the State. 1. Memo of evidence filed on behalf of the State is taken on record. 2. Having heard the submissions made by the learned advocate for the petitioners as well as the learned advocate for the State and upon perusal of materials in the case diary, it transpires that the petitioners are alleged to have restrained the nephew of the de facto complainant and poured petrol on his body. There are also allegations to set him on fire, but as he fled away, the fire could not be ignited. There is an allegation of theft of a mobile from the possession of such victim. 3. From the injury report contained in the case diary, it transpires that the patient narrated before the Medical Officer that the assailants poured petrol on whole body and the victim was referred to MMC Hospital. 2 4. Learned advocate for the State refers to seizure list dated May 21, 2026 by which one T-shirt alleged to be worn by the victim at the time of incident was seized. There is nothing in the case diary to show that such seized article was sent for chemical examination in order to ascertain the existence of petrol. The injury report does not describe any injury whatsoever on the person of the victim. 5. The First Information Report itself discloses that the victim was restrained and assaulted by the petitioners out of previous disputes. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer of the anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. 7. 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 BNSS and on further condition that petitioners shall meet the Investigating Officer once in a fortnight till the conclusion of investigation and on 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. 3 8. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is Allowed. 9. CRM (A) 2445 of 2026 is disposed of. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)