02.04.2026 Sl. No.41 NB CRM (A) 673 of 2026 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kulti PS Case No.490/2025 dated 19.08.2025 under Sections 332/103/238/61(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. And In the matter of: Pramila Nunia @ Pramila Devi … petitioner Mr. Ayan Basu, Mr. Sk. Salim, Mr. Sumit Routh. …for the petitioner. Mr. Abhishek Sinha, Mr. Abhishek Verma ..for the State. Mr. Kunal Ganguly …for the de facto complainant. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The wife of the alleged victim/de facto complainant only alleged that the petitioner and others came with arms and had taken away the petitioner. However, the dead body of the petitioner was found much later from another place. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de facto complainant strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He refers to the postmortem report, which shows that the death was due to effect of a shock following multiple ante mortem injuries as noted. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He relies on the FIR, the statements of witnesses and the postmortem report. 2 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 to the present petitioner. The application for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, thus, rejected. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order may be delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all formalities. (Jay Sengupta, J.)