Tumpa Samanta v. State Of West Bengal

03.04.2025 Court No.28 Item No.30 ssi CRM (A) 1078 of 2025 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Suraksha Nagarik Sanhita in connection with Tamluk P.S. Case No.83 of 2025 dated 03.02.2025 under Sections 329 (4)/115 (2)/117(2)/109/351 (2)/3 (5) of the BNS.

And In the matter of: Tumpa Samanta.

....Applicant/Petitioner.

Mr. Amal Krishna Samanta ...for the petitioner.

Ms. Sukanya Bhattacharya Ms. Puspita Saha ..for the State Mr. Sukumar Ghosh Ms. Moumita Ghosh ...for the defacto complainant Vakalatnama filed on behalf of the de facto complainant is taken on record.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is the wife of the prime accused. The present case is a fallout of a land dispute between two brothers. There is a case and a counter case. In fact, the petitioners have also suffered serious injuries.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de facto complainant opposes the prayer for bail and submits that one of the victims suffered grievous injury.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. She points to the statements of the victims and the neighbours as well as to the

injury reports. From NCCT of brain of one Raju Samanta, a victim, it appears that he had suffered a haemorrhagic contusion in right parietal region as also a linear non-displaced fracture of squamous part of right temporal bone. One victim had to remain in hospital for eight days.

Considering the injury reports of the victims and the statements of the victim as well as the neighbours, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

In view of the above, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Jay Sengupta, J.)