25.08.2026 Item No. 13 Ct. No. 39 C.R.M.(A) 2117 of 2026 AN (ALLOWED) In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Bowbazar Police Station Case No. 35 of 2026 dated 20.02.2026 under Sections 318(4) / 336(2) / 336(3) / 338 / 340(2) / 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to G.R.(NS) Case No. 125/2026 now pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Kolkata. In the matter of : Minal Panchal … Petitioner. Mr. Anirban Dutta Mr. A. Chakraborty Mr. Sagnik Majumdar Ms. A. Banerjee Mr. Devdas Saha …for the Petitioner. Mr. Palash Ch. Podder Mr. Deepak …for the State. Mr. Sudip Kr. Dutta Ms. Sritama Dutta Mr. Siddhartha Bose …for the de facto complainant. 1. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the present petitioner is one of the partners of a partnership firm viz. Panchal Enterprises and they were recorded tenant under the de facto complainant, who is the Sebayat of the Debottar property. He submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case though she is not involved with in any of the criminal offence as alleged. He further relies upon the order dated 25th March, 2026 passed by the learned 2 Magistrate in favour of the husband of the present petitioner granting bail on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and the parties had no objection if accused would be released on bail. He further submits that while forwarding the husband of the petitioner, the Investigating Officer also indicated that there was a settlement between the parties and a letter of surrender of tenancy premises was issued in favour of the landlord by the present petitioner and her husband. He prays for anticipatory bail of the petitioner on any terms and conditions. 2. Learned advocate appearing for the de facto complainant strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that her prayer was turned down by the learned Sessions Judge on the ground that she entered into a criminal conspiracy with M/s. Lenskart Solutions Private Limited and illegally transferred the significant portion of the ground floor of the tenancy without the knowledge and mutual consent of the parties. Accused person manufactured and fabricated some documents including the rent receipts while sub-leasing the said premises. The accused persons collected Rs. 68 lacs from the said M/s. Lenskart Solutions Private Limited. 3. On the other hand, learned advocate representing the State produces the memo of evidence, the case diary and 3 opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the investigation is under progress and the accused lady/ tenant has not complied with the notice issued under Section 35 of the BNSS, 2023. 4. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties and upon perusing the materials on record, the case diary and the memo, this Court finds that several documents were seized by the Police in the present case. Furthermore, the husband of the petitioner was allowed regular bail by the learned trial court, when parties arrived at a settlement. From the materials on record, it appears that there was a settlement between the parties. The notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023 was issued after four months of the registration of the F.I.R is contrary to law. 5. Considering the above backgrounds, this Court does not find any necessity for custodial interrogation/detention of the petitioner and the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is thus considered and allowed on the following conditions. 6. Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on the terms and conditions as he deems fit and proper and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code 4 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 7. In the event the petitioner fails to comply with the conditions as imposed by this Court, the prosecution shall be at liberty to pray for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted by this Court in accordance with law. 8. C.R.M.(A) 2117 of 2026 stands disposed of. 9. All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 10. The concerned Department is directed to supply urgent certified Photostat copy of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)