17.08.2026 Sl.No. 42 Ct. 39 Partly Allowed (Susanta) In The High Court at Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side CRM (A) No. 2043 of 2026 In Re: An application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Chakulia Police Station Case No. 404 of 2025 dated 16.10.2025 under Sections 329(4)/324(4)/115(2)/ 117(2)/109/74/351(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to GR Case no. 3469 of 2025. -And- In the matter of : Md. Ehsanul Haque @ Md. Ahsanul @ Md. Ahsanul Haque & Ors. … Petitioners Mr. Sourav Mondal, Mr. M. Nazar Chowdhury, Ms. Farheen Rais, Mr. Rony Mondal, ….for the petitioners. Mr. Lokesh Sharma, Ms. Anindita Mukherjee, ……..for the State. Ms. Suchismita Dutta, … for the de facto complainant. 1. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petitioners and the de-facto complainant are neighbours. They have been falsely implicated into this case. Accordingly, he prays for their anticipatory bail in any terms and conditions. 2. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the de-facto complainant strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the present petitioners and submitted that 2 accused persons had brutally assaulted the victim and she suffered grievous injury on her head and all over the portion of the body. She also relies upon the injury report. 3. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State also opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and places reliance of the injury report as well as the statement recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS, 2023. 4. Having heard the submissions of the learned Counsels of the respective parties and on perusal of the materials available on record as well as the Case Diary including the injury reports, this Court finds there are sufficient materials and their participation in the offence as alleged is specifically mentioned by the victim insofar as the petitioner Nos. 1, 2, 4 & 5 are concerned and so far as the petitioner no. 3 is concerned, this Court is of the opinion that there are shaky evidences against him. Accordingly his prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed whereas the other petitioners are concerned, this Court is not inclined to allow their prayer for anticipatory bail. 5. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner no. 3, namely, Md. Mahfuz Alam @ Mahafuz @ Mahfooz Alam is allowed. 6. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on the 3 terms and conditions as he deems fit and proper and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 7. In the event the petitioner fails to comply with any of the conditions mentioned above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to pray for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted by this Court in accordance with law. 8. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of with above observations. 9. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court. 10. 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. )