14.10.2026 Court No.35. D/L.74. Rakib (Allowed) CRM (A) 3825 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Rampurhat Police Station case no. 44 of 2026 dated 19.01.2026 under Sections 316(2)/351(2)(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. And In the matter of : Md. Firdosh @ Md. Firdous & Anr. ……Petitioners. Mr. Sanat Kr. Das Mr. Sujan Chatterjee Mr. Rahan Bavishi ......for the Petitioners. Mr. Anindya Ghosh Mr. Pronojit Roy ……for the State. Mr. Aloke Chatterjee Mr. Arghya Mullick .....for the De-facto complainant. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submit that petitioners have been foisted with the criminal case on the accusations of being in conspiracy with another accused whose anticipatory bail has been rejected. I have taken into account the order passed in CRM (A) 3512 of 2026 where principally the application for anticipatory bail was rejected on the ground that the said accused has similar antecedents also. On a specific query from this Court, learned advocate appearing for the State submits that there are no signatures in relation with the document by which there has been transfer and the vehicle was solely in the name of the accused whose anticipatory bail has been rejected. 2 Having considered that the petitioners are not similarly situated as the other accused person whose anticipatory bail has been rejected, I am inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail. As such, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner namely, Md. Firdosh @ Md. Firdous and Ekaram Mohammad @ Md. Ekram is allowed. Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer on such terms and conditions as he deems fit and proper subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Additionally, petitioners shall make themselves available as and when required by the investigating officer of the case. Accordingly, CRM (A) 3825 of 2026 is allowed. The observations made above are only restricted for adjudication of the anticipatory bail application and should not be considered a final opinion on the merits of the case. Memo of evidence submitted by the State be kept with the record. 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.)