Sujata Bibi @ Chaina Bibi v. State Of West Bengal
03.02.2026 Court No.28. (D.Hira)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CRM (A) 134 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 Amdanga Police Station Case No. 64 of 2025 dated 19.01.2025 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 156 of 2025, under Sections 126(2)/118(2)/109/351(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, And In the matter of: - Sujata Bibi @ Chaina Bibi .....petitioner.
Mr. Arun Kumar Mohanty, Mr. R.R. Mohanty, Ms. Pusprita Chowdhury, Mr. B. Baug.
.
...for the petitioner.
Ms. Rituparna De. Ghosh, Ms. Sreetama Das.
...for the State.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that this is a second application for anticipatory bail due to certain material changes in circumstance. While FIR was lodged, inter alia, under Sections 126(2) / 118(2)/109/351(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Naya Sanhita Act, 2023, charge-sheet was submitted without Section 109. As there is a lesser charge in the charge-sheet, it is a good ground moving the second application for the anticipatory bail.
In view of the above, the second application for anticipatory bail is taken up for hearing.
On merits learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. During pendency of the proceeding and after filing of charge-sheet, a co-accused was granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court. The principal accused has now been granted bail.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He refers to the statement of neighbours at pages 4, 13 and 14 and the victim at page 13 and also on the injury reports.
Considering the above, the other incriminating materials available in the case diary, and the alleged roles ascribed to the present petitioner, 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 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.)