26/02/2026 D/L – 24 Court No.28 S. Kundu Rejected C.R.M.(A) 494 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023. In connection with Kaliachak P.S case no. 1514 of 2025 dated 29/8/2025 under sections 3/4 of the Explosive Substances Act. In the matter of: Rakib Sk @ Rafik Sk ...Petitioner. Mr. Sourav Mukherjee Mr. Prayankar Ganguly Ms. Shalini Bairagi Ms. P. Chakraborty …for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjoy Bardhan Mr. Rahul Ganguly …for the State. 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. A similarly circumstanced co-accused was granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 28/11/2025 in CRM (A) 3773 of 2025. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that the first recovery of explosive substances was from near a health centre and the second one from a mango garden. Other than the statement of the co-accused, there is a criminal antecedent against the present petitioner involving offences under the Explosive Substances Act and the Arms Act. A similarly circumstanced co-accused 2 was denied the benefit of anticipatory bail by this Court on 8/1/2026 in CRM (A) 4074 of 2025. 3. It appears that a co-accused was granted anticipatory bail but he did not have any criminal antecedent. But, another co-accused having criminal antecedent of similar nature was denied the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4. Considering the above and the other incriminating materials available in the case diary, I do not consider this to be a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. 5. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Jay Sengupta, J.)