SK SAFIUL ISLAM @ SAFIUL ISLAM @ TUHIN v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
CRM (A)/1707/2026 · 2026-08-14
Tirthankar Ghosh
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 35638 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 35638 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
14.08.2026 Court No.35. D/L.14. Rakib (Allowed)
CRM (A) 1707 of 2026
In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kolaghat Police Station case no. 212 of 2026 dated 02.04.2026 under Sections 115(2) / 117(2) / 119(1) / 303(2) / 324(4) / 329(3) / 351(2) / 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
And In the matter of : Sk. Safiul Islam @ Safiul Islam @ Tuhin.
……Petitioner. Mr. Kunal Ganguly
.....for the Petitioner. Mr. Bankim Pal
……for the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that there is inter se dispute between the neighbours, for which the present criminal case has been registered. Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and produces the Case diary. The injury report available do not reflect any serious injuries and is restricted to physical assault only. Having considered the same, I am of the opinion that custodial detention of the present petitioner may not be warranted in connection with the instant case. As such, prayer for prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner namely, Sk. Safiul Islam @ Safiul Islam @ Tuhin is allowed. As such, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer on such
2 terms and conditions as he deems fit and proper subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. As the investigation of the case is still in progress, the petitioner, within a period of ten days, shall make himself available before the Investigating Officer of the case and thereafter, the Investigating Officer of the case, if required, would fix subsequent dates for presence of the petitioner for the sake of investigation. With the aforesaid observations, CRM (A) 1707 of 2026 is allowed. Memo of evidence submitted by the State be kept with the record. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)