Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 35037 (CAL)

MD SAMIR AND ANR. v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (A)/2222/2026 · 2026-08-17

Partha Sarathi Chatterjee

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

17.08.2026 Ct. No. 446 Sl. No.55 akd [ALLOWED] C. R. M. (A) 2222 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed on 08.07.2026 in connection with Islampur Police Station Case No. 306 of 2026 dated 02.04.2026 under Sections 109/115(2)/117(2)/329(3)/351(3)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (G.R. Case No. 898 of 2026) And In Re: Md. Samir … … Petitioner Mr. Sourav Mondal Mr. M. Nazar Chowdhury Mr. Farheen Rais Mr. Rony Mondal Mr. Arijit Bhuiya … … for the petitioner Mr. Parmanand Sharma .. ld. Addl. Public Prosecutor Mr. Radhey Shyam Tiwari … … for the State 1. This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Islampur Police Station Case No. 306 of 2026 dated 02.04.2026 under Sections 109/115(2)/117(2)/329(3)/351(3)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, following a dispute arising over a piece of land, the incident occurred. There was a free fight between two groups of people. He further submits that there is a counter-case, being Islampur Police Station Case No. 307 of 2026 dated 2nd April, 2026. Accordingly, he submits that custodial interrogation of the present petitioner is not necessary. 2 3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor produces the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner on the basis of the materials available therein. 4. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for both the parties and perused the case diary as well as the other materials on record. 5. Record reveals that charge-sheet vide No. 378 of 2026 dated 31st May, 2026, has been submitted. There is a case and counter-case between the parties. The incident allegedly occurred in the presence of direct evidence. Noting these facts, I am of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary and that he may be granted anticipatory bail. 6. Accordingly, I direct that in the event of arrest, the accused/petitioner, namely, Md. Samir, be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only), with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Islampur, Uttar Dinajpur and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 7. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. (Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)