Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 40121 (CAL)

HANSA MONDAL @ HASA MONDAL AND ANR v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (A)/1976/2026 · 2026-09-11

Ajay Kumar Gupta

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

11.09.2026 Item No. 03 Ct. No. 39 C.R.M.(A) 1976 of 2026 AN (ALLOWED) In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Anandapur Police Station Case No. 184 of 2026 dated 11.05.2026 under Sections 115(2) / 118(1) / 118(2) / 126(2) / 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to A.C.G.R. Case No. 2325 of 2026 now pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore. In the matter of : Hansa Mondal alias Hasa Mondal & anr. … Petitioners. Mr. Abhra Mukherjee Mr. Sauradeep Dutta Mr. Arpayan Mukherjee Mr. Swakshar Kumar Mondal Mr. Himadree Ghosh …for the Petitioners. Ms. Priti Kar Bagchi …for the State. 1. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are supporters of a particular political party and they have been falsely implicated in this case due to their political background and rivalry. 2. The F.I.R. has been registered after six days of the alleged incident. Victims were not treated on the date of incident rather they treated on 10th May, 2026 after a lapse of five days is wholly concocted and manufactured story, as such learned advocate prays for anticipatory bail for the petitioners on any terms and conditions. 2 3. On the other hand, learned advocate representing the State produces the memo of evidence, the case diary, the injury report in original and vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners. 4. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and upon perusal of the materials available on record including the memo of evidence, the case diary, and the injury report in original and the statement of the witnesses recorded, this court is of the opinion that this is a fit case for allowing the petitioners’ anticipatory bail as no custodial interrogation/detention of the petitioners is necessary. Hence, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is considered and allowed. 5. Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on the terms and conditions as he deems fit and proper and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code corresponding to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 6. In the event the petitioners fail to comply with the conditions as imposed by this Court, the prosecution shall be at liberty to pray for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted by this Court in accordance with law. 7. C.R.M.(A) No. 1976 of 2026 stands disposed of. 3 8. All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 9. The concerned Department is directed to supply urgent certified Photostat copy of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)