07.09.2026 Court No.35. M/L. 119. Kausik (Partly Allowed) CRM (A) 985 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Keshiary PS Case No. 78/2025 dated 14.04.2025 under Section 332(b)/118(1)/117(2)/70(1)/75/76/303(2)/351(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. And In the matter of : Shanti Soren & Ors. ……Petitioners. Mr. Tushar Kanti Har Mr. Avra Mukherjee Mr. Somnath Chakraborty Mr. Arpayan Mukherjee ……for the Petitioners. Mr. Amit Ranjan Pati Ms. Swastika Chowdhury Ms. Ilika Nag Mr. Avijit Chatterjee ….for the defacto complainant. Mr. Krishnendu Bhattacharya, APP Mr. Somnath Adhikary ….for the State. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent who have been falsely implicated in the instant case. So far as the principal accused persons are concerned, they have already been granted bail. As such, petitioners may be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 2 Learned advocate for the defacto complainant submits that so far as the accused persons are concerned, there was no effective investigation pursuant to the defacto complainant having preferred the writ petition. Things moved and subsequently the case proceeded for investigation. Consequently, the arrests were made. Learned advocate lastly opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. Learned advocate for the State, on the other hand, draws the attention of the Court to the incidents complained of, particularly, the statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS. I have taken into account the said statements and I find that three of the accused persons, principally against whom there were accusations were arrested and were granted bail after 7 months. So far as the present petitioners are concerned, I find there are some accusations against the petitioner no. 5, namely, Gyan Hembram. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner no. 5, namely, Gyan Hembram is hereby rejected. So far as the other accused petitioners are concerned, their prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed as their custodial detention may not be warranted in the facts of the case. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 are allowed. 3 As such, I direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioners namely, (1) Shanti Soren, (2) Laxmi Mandi, (3) Ram Murmu, (4) Nirmal Mandi, (5) Gejo Mandi, (6) Mohan Hembram be released on bail subject to the satisfaction of the investigating officer/arresting officer of the case and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and/or under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. As charge sheet has already been submitted, this order of anticipatory bail will remain in force for a period of 6 weeks. Accordingly, CRM (A) 985 of 2026 is partly allowed. 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.)