09.09.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.649 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected C.R.M. (A) 2950 of 2026 In Re : An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Haringhata Police Station Case No. 301 dated 03.06.2026 under Sections 329(3)/115(2)/ 117(2)/74/303(2)/324(4)/351(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. And In Re : Bikash Shil ... Petitioner. Mr. Ansuman Bera, Mr. Subrata Bhattacharyya, Ms. Rusha Mukherjee ... For the Petitioner. Mr. Subhas Chandra Saha, Mr. Bankim Pal ... For the State. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is suffering from severe medical ailments and has been foisted with the criminal case over a neighbouring dispute. Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and draws the attention of the Court to the injury report. I have taken into account the statement of the injured as well as the injury report. Having considered the same, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the present petitioner. As such, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. However, if the petitioner appears and surrenders before the learned Magistrate and the learned Magistrate is 2 of a different opinion after assessing the medical documents, learned Magistrate would independently consider the same without being swayed by any observations made hereinabove. 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) 2950 of 2026, is, thus, disposed of. 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.)