Sajal Bag And ANR. v. State Of West Bengal

21.04.2026 Court No.28 Item No.52 ssi CRM (A) 723 of 2026 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Suraksha Nagarik Sanhita in connection with Bagnan Police Station Case No. 196 of 2021 dated 06.04.2021 under Sections 341/324/325/379/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act.

And In the matter of: Sajal Bag & another.

.... Petitioners Mr. Kunal Ganguly ...for the petitioners Mr. Imran Ali Ms. Sonali Bhar ...for the State Memo of evidence filed on behalf of the State is taken on record. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows that the petitioners stand on the same footing as one Bijal Bag, who has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court earlier. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that a proclamation has been issued against the present petitioners. The leader of the assailants, namely one Swarup Khanra was denied the benefit of anticipatory bail by a Division Bench of this Court on 25.11.2021. However, another co-accused Bijal Bag was granted anticipatory bail by a Division Bench of this Court on 12.09.2024. The petitioner who was granted anticipatory bail stood on a much better footing than the present petitioners. It was alleged that the present petitioners, along with another co-accused, continued to hack the victim with a sword.

Considering the above, the other incriminating materials available in the case diary, the alleged roles ascribed to the present petitioners and the fact that the proclamation has been issued against the present petitioners, I do not consider this is to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is rejected. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible. (Jay Sengupta, J.)