AD 74 April 6, 2026 Ct. 28 SG CRM(A) 410 of 2026 Reject An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Baranagar P.S. Case No.479 of 2025 dated 12.12.2025 under Sections 69/316(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. And In the matter of: Sanmitra Das … petitioner Mr. Debasis Kar Mr. Husen Mustafi … for the petitioner Mr. Prasun Kumar Dutta Ms. Puspita Saha … for the State Mr. Santanu Mukherjee Ms. Madhumita Kar … for the de facto complainant Report filed by the State is taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The de facto complainant has been changing her stand. Learned counsel for the de facto complainant submits that there is a suppression in the application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner’s earlier application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge on 21.01.2026. This has not been disclosed in the present application. Apart from that, the petitioner, in a pre-planned manner, took objectionable photographs of the victim, blackmailed her and extorted huge sums of money. Thereafter, he circulated the vulgar photographs on social media. 2 Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail, relies on the case diary and the report and submits that during investigation it was revealed that in order to execute his plan, the petitioner had hired a phone from a rickshaw-puller, used it to take certain vulgar photographs of the alleged victim and thereafter extorted money from the victim by threatening to circulate the same. Even after taking money, the photographs were circulated on social media. He also relies on the statements of the rickshaw-puller and other witnesses. Most of the objectionable photographs have already been seized. Considering the above and the other incriminating materials available in the case diary, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, rejected. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of requisite formalities. [ (Jay Sengupta, J.)