25.08.2026 Sl.No. 9 Ct. 39 Allowed Amalranjan In The High Court At Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side CRM (A) No. 2059 of 2026 In Re: An application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/corresponding to under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; filed in connection with GR no. A2152 of 2026 arising out of Rejinagar Police Station Case No. 122/2026 dated 08.05.2026 under Sections 329(3)/126(2)/118(2)/324(5)/351(2)/351(3)/3(5) of BNS. -And- In the matter of : Mannan Sk @ Abdul Mannan Sk & Ors. … Petitioners Mr. Kingsuk Mondal Mr. Suman Das ….for the petitioners Mr. Malay Dhar ……..for the State 1. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. They are not at all involved in any offences as alleged. He prays for anticipatory bail on any terms and conditions. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and produces the case diary and memo of evidence as well as the report of ASI Manas Pande, Rejinagar PS, Murshidabad PD dated 21.08.2026, which indicates that the date of incident was wrongly recorded as 08.05.2026 instead of 07.05.2026 in the FIR. He further relies upon the injury report and 2 medical report and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners. 3. Having heard the learned counsels for the respective parties and on perusal of the materials available on record as well as the case diary including the medical report of the victim, it is clearly established that the petitioners were initially treated in Beldanga one BPHC Hospital at Murshidabad wherein the date of treatment was indicated as 07.05.2026 and another injury report, i.e., Murshidabad Medical College and Hospital also indicates the date of treatment as 07.05.2026. 4. However, in the FIR the date of actual incident was 08.05.2026 and, subsequently, on 09.06.2026 after expiry of two months, a statement indicated the actual incident took place on 07.05.2026. All these dichotomies appearing in the case diary. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts, this court finds that this is a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners, namely, 1) Mannan Sk @ Abdul Mannan Sk, 2) Najbul Sk @ Md Najbul Sk 3) Ajabul Sk @ Md Ajabul Sk and 4) Wajed Ali Sk @ Yachhed Sekh is allowed. 7. In the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on the terms and conditions as he deems fit and proper and 3 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. 8. In the event the petitioners fail 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. 9. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. 10. The Memo of evidence filed by the State is taken on record. 11. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court. 12. 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. )