Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9103 (CAL)

JABBAR ANSARI v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (A)/1016/2026 · 2026-04-02

Jay Sengupta

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

02.04.2026 Court No.28 Item No.12 tbsr Allowed CRM (A) 1016 of 2026 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Jagatdal P.S. Case No.72 of 2025 dated 27.03.2025 under Sections 126(2)/117(2)/118(2)/109/351(2)/3(5) of the BNS read with Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, 1959. And In the matter of: Jabbar Ansari ….Petitioner. Mr. S. Dutta Mr. Jiten Barik Ms. Debjani Roy Chaudhuri ….for the petitioner Mr. Saibal Bapuli Mr. Mujibar Ali Naskar .. for the State Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. This is a case where certain members of the opposition political party of the State have been falsely implicated. The petitioner was an associate of the main political figure, who was granted anticipatory bail by this Court. The petitioner is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that the investigation is going on as directed by this Court and is being conducted by Special Investigation Team. The relevant CCTV footages were collected pursuant to which notices were sent to some accused including the petitioner and the petitioner cooperated with investigation by meeting the Investigating Officer. In his statement, the petitioner has claimed to be a witness rather than an accused. 2 Considering the above, the other materials available in the case diary, the fact that one of the co-accused was granted anticipatory bail by this Court and the fact that the petitioner has responded to the notice issued by the Investigating Agency and met the Investigating Officer pursuant to the said notice, I do not think that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required in this case and I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and also be 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 BNSS, 2023 and on further condition that the petitioner shall cooperate with investigation, shall meet the I.O. once a fortnight till submission of report in final form and shall not threaten or intimidate witnesses. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for. (Jay Sengupta, J.)