27.08.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.1 CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI Ct.No.35 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION dc. rejected FROM PRINCIPAL BENCH C.R.M. (A) 690 of 2026 In Re : An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Matigara Police Station Case No. 469 of 2026 dated 19.07.2026 under Sections 316(2)/318(4)/69/ 61(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (G.R. Case No. 2787/2026). And In Re : Raja Chatterjee ... Petitioner. Mr. Swapan Banerjee, Mr. Moyukh Mukherjee, Mr. Kaustav Banerjee ... For the Petitioner. Mr. Avrojyoti Das, APP, Ms. Ruchika Agarwal, Mr. S. Nag ... For the State. Mr. Jayanta Samanta, Mrs. Karunamoyee Samanta, Mrs. Satabdi Bhattacharya, Ms. Riddhi Naskar ... For the de facto complainant. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner prays for anticipatory bail and emphasises on the fact that petitioner was a railway employee and is suffering from certain disabilities. The present case has been foisted upon him with wild allegations. Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits a report. The nature of the accusations is not restricted only to deceive the informant of huge sum of money, but also 2 misusing the trust. The case diary reflects that there are three other case pending against the present petitioner being Netaji Nagar P.S. Case No. 135 of 2026, Rampurhat P.S. Case No. 525 of 2026 and Durgapur Women P.S. Case No. 27 of 2026. In all the other three cases, I find that the ladies are the victims and who have set the law into motion. Having regard to the antecedents of the present petitioner, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. As such, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. So far as the medical grounds are concerned, petitioner’s regular bail be considered on such aspect, in case he appears before the jurisdictional court. Memo of Evidence submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record. The application for anticipatory bail, being CRM (A) 690 of 2026, is, thus, dismissed. All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly 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.)