14.08.2026 Item No.36 Court No.551 CHC Rejected In The High Court at Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side C.R.M.(A) 2397 of 2026 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; in connection with Kaliachak Police Station Case No. 619 of 2026 dated 10.05.2026 under Sections 316(2) /318(2) /318(3) /318(4) /61(2) /336(2)/336(3)/337/338 of the Bharatiya Naya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, pending before the learned CJM at Malda. And In the matter of: Md. Hafijul Islam ...… petitioner Mr. Mukunda Lal Sarkar, Advocate Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee, Advocate .…for the petitioner Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta, Advocate Ms. Sreshtha Ghosh, Advocate Ms. Sanjana Jha, Advocate .…for the State 1. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is taken up for consideration. 2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed any crime at all. He just introduced a lawyer to de facto complainant. 3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that it is the said lawyer who was paid with sum of Rs.7,50,000/- for obtaining a bail order in favour of the brother of the de facto complainant. 4. Learned advocate appearing for the State submits that Rs.7,50,000/- was procured from the de facto complainant on a promise to obtain a bail order in 2 favour of the brother of the de facto complainant who was in custody in connection with NDPS Case. 5. Learned advocate appearing for the State relies upon various materials in the Case Diary including a fake order passed in the name of Calcutta High Court granting bail to the brother of the de facto complainant, which was utilized for the purpose of persuading the de facto complainant to deliver the money. 6. He further submits that the investigation of the case is yet to conclude and petitioner is very much required for the purpose of interrogation. 7. Considering the nature of allegations made against the present petitioner and in consideration of the materials in the Case Diary as well as taking into account that the investigation of the case is yet to be concluded, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 8. Prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. 9. CRM (A) 2397 of 2026 is dismissed. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.) CHINMOY CHAKRABORTY Digitally signed by CHINMOY CHAKRABORTY Date: 2026.08.14 18:37:23 +05'30'