← Library
Calcutta High CourtCRM (A)/102/2026rejected

Bishal Dhanuk v. State Of West Bengal

2026-02-17Hon'Ble Justice Jay Sengupta2 pages

17.02.2026 Sl. No.26 NB CRM (A) 102 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 Barasat Cyber Crime PS Case No.31/2025 dated 26.05.2025 under Sections 318(4)/316(2)/61(2) of the BNS, 2023. And In the matter of: Bishal Dhanuk ... petitioner Mr. Angshuman Chakraborty, Mr. S. S. Saha.

...for the petitioner.

Ms. Subhasree Patel, Mr. Debadrita Mondal.

..for the State.

Report filed on behalf of the State is taken on record. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no clue about any fraud that might have gone on. The petitioner's PAN Card and Aadhar Card were misused by one Anup Biswas, a coaccused for opening a Demat Account and that the said Anup Biswas has already been granted bail on the basis of a compromise application.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the case diary and the report and submits as follows. The present petitioner is directly involved in the money fraud. The petitioner and his associates are operating a scam. There are other victims who had made complaints in this regard. In connection with the present case, a total amount of Rs.22,88,656/- belonging to an elderly person was allegedly defalcated. Out of the total sum, Rs.3,90,000/- was transferred to the bank account of the present petitioner. Upon

enquiry, it was revealed that the bank account contains the e-mail ID of the present petitioner and the phone number of the father of the petitioner.

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 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.)