SAGAR SK @ SAGAR ALI AND ORS. v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
CRM (A)/2468/2026 · 2026-08-27
Md Shabbar Rashidi
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 36284 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 36284 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
27.08.2026 Serial no. 9 Anticipatory bail [Rejected] Dd In the High Court at Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdictional Appellate Side CRM (A)/2468/2026 In re : An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Beldanga Police Station Case No. 166 of 2026 dated 25.03.2026 under Sections 117(7)/ 118(2)/ 126(2)/3(5)/ 109 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. -And- In the matter of : SAGAR SK @ SAGAR ALI AND ORS. … …Petitioners Mr. Arnab Chatterjee, Advocate Mr. Anisur Rahman, Advocate
… … For the Petitioners Mr. Sagar Saha, Advocate Ms. Nayana Mukhopadhyay, Advocate … …For the State
1. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioners that over the selfsame incident a proceeding under Sections 170/126 BNSS, 2023 was started against the petitioners and others. He further submits that there was a previous First Information Report against the petitioners and in such case, the petitioners are on anticipatory bail. Such First Information Report was lodged two days prior to the present First Information Report. He submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. He prays for anticipatory bail.
2. Learned advocate appearing for the State relies upon the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 180 BNSS, 2023 as well as injury reports. He opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
2
3. Having considered the rival submissions we well as on perusal of materials in the case dairy, it transpires that as per the statements made by the witnesses, the petitioners are alleged to have assaulted the victim with deadly weapon. The injury report shows multiple fracture of ribs. The investigation of the case is still pending.
4. Considering the nature of injury, gravity of the offence, the statement of witnesses as well as injury report, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.
6. CRM (A)/2468/2026 is dismissed. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)