15.10.2026 Item No.4 Ct. No. 34 debajyoti/nb CRM(A) 3160 of 2026 In Re.: An application for Anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. to Section in connection with Bidhannagar Cyber Crime Police Station Case No.100 of 2026 dated 01-07-2026 under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 336(2), 337, 340(2), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. In the matter of: Bijay Kumar Periwal & Anr. ...… Petitioners. Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Sr. Adv, Mr. Subham Chatterjee, Ms. Priyanka Barik, ..… For the Petitioners. Mr. Brajesh Jha, Ld. P.P. Mr. Subhajit Chatterjee, Mr. Soumalya Dutta, … for the State. Mr. Sudipta Maitra, Sr. Adv, Mr. Pawan Kr. Gupta, Ms. Sofia Nesar, Mr. Santanu Sett, ..…For the de facto complainant. 1. Apprehending arrest the petitioners have filed this application for anticipatory bail in connection with G.R. case No.910 of 2026 arising out of Bidhannagar Cyber Crime Police Station Case No.100 of 2026 dated 01-07- 2026 under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 336(2), 337, 340(2), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. It is the contention of the learned Senior Advocate representing the petitioners that they have been falsely implicated. The present petitioner no 1 was appointed as an Additional Director by giving letter of letter appointment and question of forging any signature does not have any connection with this present petitioner. The name of the present petitioners as Director was uploaded in the official portal, Ministry of Corporate Affair along with Form no. DIR-12, which is a requisite for appointment of any Director whatsoever of a company. The petitioner no. 2 is one of the Directors of the said company .It is further submits that opposite party no.2 de facto complainant is the holder of 33.33 per cent share holder of the company “ Sai Surya Developers Private Ltd. and the letter of appointed was given by one Kishor Chowdhury along with Ankit Chowdhury are also holding 33.33 per cent share of the said Company. 3. It is further submitted that petitioner no.2 is also having 33.33 per cent of share and the total share of the present petitioner no.2 as well as Kishor Chowdhury and Ankit Chowdhury the other Directors goes to 66.66 % in the said company, to that extent they are majority share holder. It is further submitted that he has duly complied with the notice under Section 35(3) BNSS and under takes to co-operate the Investigating Authorities. It is further submitted by the learned Senior Counsel 2 that regarding this procedure of appointment of Bijay Kumar Periwal, a proceeding has been initiated before NCLT, that is still pending for any decision. 4. On behalf of the prosecution objection has been raised and it is submitted that investigation is going on. There are sufficient materials against the present petitioners and from the statements collected in course of investigation, it is evident that the said Board resolution was adopted in absence of the present de facto complainant and the Chartered Accountant uploaded the said name of the petitioner no.1 pursuant to the direction of another Director, Kishor Chowdhury. It is further submitted that if the prayer of the petitioners is allowed at this stage, the further investigation may be jeopardized. 5. On behalf of the de facto complainant, serious objection has been raised and it is strenuously argued that the Board resolution was adopted beyond the knowledge of the present de facto complainant, when he is also a Director. This is a corporate offence and in order to grab the entire company by not following norms, such steps were taken. Not only that, they have manufactured certain documents, which are yet to be collected by the prosecution and allowing the prayer of the present petitioners in this regard would cause 3 severe prejudice to the de facto complainant. It is further submitted that as per his information, there are some criminal antecedents against the present petitioner no.1. In this regard, he has found certain materials from the website. However no specific information can be furnished . 6. Heard the submissions of the learned advocates representing the respective parties. Perused the materials on record and the Case Diary and the contents of the complaint lodged against the present petitioners. 7. On close scrutiny, of the above facts and circumstances, the genesis of the dispute can be found regarding appointment of Bijay Kumar Periwal as the Additional Director of the said company of which both the de facto complainant and the petitioner no.2 and Kishor Chowdhury and Ankit Chowdhury and the Directors. It transpired from the Case Diary also that the statements were recorded of various witnesses including that of the de facto complainant under Section 183of BNSS and declaration was given to the Officer-in-Charge, Bidhannagar Cyber Crime P.S. by Kishor Chowdhury whereby it was mentioned that immediately after being informed about the procedural mishap, the said Bijay Kumar Periwal has tendered resignation, which has 4 been accepted. In addition, it is seen that a procedure is pending regarding such procedural laches before the NCLT and the same is still pending. 8. The Case Diary further demonstrates that the petitioners have complied with the 35(3) notice on two occasions. Hence, it cannot be said that they are evading the process of investigation. 9. Therefore, upon conspectus of the entire facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegation levelled against the present petitioners, which pertains to procedural laches in appointment of a Director against which a procedure is pending before NCLT, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the present petitioners in this case may not be necessary. With regard to the criminal antecedents no specific details could be furnished either by State or the the defacto complainant which can be relied upon. 10. Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail upon furnishing bonds of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each, with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of arresting officer and also subject to the condition as laid down in sub-section (2) of section 482 of BNSS. In addition to the above, the 5 petitioners will follow the conditions which are as follows:- a) The petitioners shall not intimidate the witnesses and/or tamper with evidence, in any manner whatsoever and shall not commit any cognizable offence in any manner whatsoever. b) The petitioners shall appear before the I.O. of this case once in a week or as and when required for the purpose of investigation and to render all sorts of cooperation as asked for the sake of completion of investigation. d) In the event, the petitioners failed to comply with any of the conditions stipulated above, order of anticipatory bail shall be treated as cancelled in accordance with law without further reference to this Court. 11. The application for Anticipatory Bail is, thus, allowed. 12. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 13. 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.) 6 7