3. 06-10-2026 (ct. no.34) (allowed) pp IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction CRM(A) 3142 of 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 in connection with Nanoor Police Station Case No.129 of 2026 dated 04-07-2026 under Sections 386/120B/34 of Indian Penal Code read with Section 25/27 of Arms Act. - A n d - In the matter of : Sk. Manirul @ Sekh Manirul @ Manirul Haque & Ors. .... Petitioners. Ms. Minoti Gomes, Md. Hafiz Ali … For the Petitioners. Mr. Sayak Chakraborty, Ms. Namrata Chatterjee … For the State. Ms. Ameena Kabir ….for de-facto complainant 1. Apprehending arrest, the petitioners have filed the instant application praying for anticipatory bail in respect of Nanoor Police Station Case No.129 of 2026 dated 04-07- 2026 under Sections 386/120B/34 of Indian Penal Code read with Section 25/27 of Arms Act which is pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bolpur, Birbhum. 2. Having heard both the learned advocates for the parties, it transpires that a complaint has been lodged in the month of July, 2026 in respect of an incident allegedly took place on 10th May, 2021 when they were threatened to sign on blank paper under gunpoint. It further transpires that 2 both the parties have filed their respective civil suits over the disputed property which is a brick-kiln. 3. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the defacto complainant that since the present petitioners belongs to the erstwhile ruling dispensation, no complaint could be lodged during their regime and hence there has been an inordinate delay . 4. However, nothing can be found for such inordinate delay in lodging the complaint as the incident alleged of the year 2021 and 2024. Furthermore civil disputes are pending between the parties and the nature of allegations made appears to be vague and omnibus in nature . 5. Considering the above facts and circumstances this Court is of the considered view that custodial interrogation is not warrented and hence the petitioners are entitled to be released on anticiparoty bail. 5. Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioners, namely, Sk. Manirul @ Sekh Manirul @ Manirul Haque, Md. Ikbal and Md. Mamon shall be released on bail upon furnishing bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten Thousand) each, with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioners shall abide by the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the BNSS. In addition, the petitioners will appear before the Investigating Officer once in a week till the investigation is completed or so long the petitioners are asked to be presents and shall also cooperate with the investing agency. 6. In the event the petitioners failed to adhere to any of the conditions stipulated above, the learned court will be at liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail without further reference of this Court. 3 7. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed. 8. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 9. Criminal Section is directed to supply certified copies of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. [Chaitali Chatterjee (Das), J.]