Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 39347 (CAL)

SAMIR KUMAR MAJHI v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

CRM (A)/2367/2026 · 2026-09-10

Md Shabbar Rashidi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

10.09.2026 Item No.1 Court No.551 (Bench ID:266058) CHC Rejected In The High Court at Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side C.R.M.(A) 2367 of 2026 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Cyber Crime Gonda Police Station Case No. 0010 of 2024 dated 16.09.2024 under Sections 319(2)/318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 66D of Information Technology Act, 2008. And In the matter of : Samir Kumar Majhi ...… petitioner Mr. Domishuddin Abbasi, Advocate .…for the petitioner Mr. Somnath Bera, Advocate ….for the State 1. The present petition has come up before this Court for anticipatory transit bail. The case relates to State of Uttar Pradesh being Cyber Crime Gonda Police Station Case No.0010 of 2024. 2. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that the petitioner is under the medical treatment. He seeks anticipatory transit bail in order to enable him to attend before the Jurisdictional Court where the matter is being tried. 3. Learned advocate for the State refers to various materials in the Case Diary and submits that the petitioner is 2 wanted in connection with the case which involves Cyber Crime. The petitioner is alleged to have purchased stolen mobile hand-set. He opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. 4. From the materials placed before this Court, it appears that for the medical treatment, the petitioner has relied upon document which was issued on June 15, 2026. In such medical document, the petitioner was advised to take rest for four weeks which has already elapsed. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory transit bail to the petitioner. 6. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. 7. CRM (A) 2367 of 2026 is dismissed. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.) CHINMOY CHAKRABORTY Digitally signed by CHINMOY CHAKRABORTY Date: 2026.09.10 17:58:22 +05'30'