17.08.2026 DL-131 Court No.551 [Bench ID-266058] (AD) (Allowed) In the High Court at Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side C.R.M. (A) 2535 of 2026 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Netaji Nagar Police Station Case No.193 of 2025 dated 29.08.2025 under Sections 318(4)/316(2)/351(2)/352/61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to A.C.G.R. No.5315 of 2025 which is presently pending in the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, District-South 24 Parganas. And In the matter of: Debasish Talukdar & Anr. ….petitioners Mr. Shibaji Kumar Das, Advocate Ms. Deblina De, Advocate …for the petitioners Mr. Pritam Roy, Advocate Mr. Ranojoy Chatterjee, Advocate … for the State 1. As per the allegations made in the First Information Report, the petitioners entered into a criminal conspiracy and dishonestly induced the de facto complainant to deliver the huge amount of money amounting to Rs.26,22,500/- with promise to repay the same. However, later on, the petitioners are said to have refused to pay back the loan amount. The loan was advanced in the year 2021. 2. On the other hand, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that they never took loan. The de facto complainant being brother-in-law of petitioner no.1 voluntarily extended the amount for the studies of the daughter of the petitioner no.1 since the de facto complainant had no child of his own. The petitioners 2 never approached the de facto complainant for grant of loan. 3. Learned Advocate appearing for the State submits that huge amount of money was procured by the present petitioners on false promise to repay. Last of such payment was made in the year 2024. However, later on, the petitioners refused to pay back the loan amount giving in the instant case. 4. According to the learned Advocate appearing for the State, the petitioners are guilty of the offence of cheating as well as misappropriation of property. He opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. 5. As noted above, the de facto complainant advanced the money to the petitioners. It is the case made out in the First Information Report itself that the de facto complainant paid out the advance at the request of the petitioners which was, of course, with a condition to repay the same. So far as the case made out, the element of false promise or inducement by the present petitioners is not supported. 6. De facto complainant voluntarily advanced the loan amount in favour of the petitioners which they have refused. There are legal ways and means for the recovery of such loan amount. 7. In such circumstances, considering the aforesaid materials in the case diary as well as the other materials placed before this Court, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to 3 the petitioners. 8. 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 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and on condition that the petitioner no.1 will report before the Investigating Officer once in a week until the conclusion of the trial and the petitioner no.2 will cooperate with the investigation until the conclusion of the trial 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. 9. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. 10. C.R.M. (A) 2535 of 2026 is disposed of. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.) ABHIJIT DAS Digitally signed by ABHIJIT DAS Date: 2026.08.17 19:04:55 +05'30'