Jahangir Sekh @ Sariful v. State Of West Bengal

08.04.2025 Sl. No.17 Ct. 28 Reject NB C.R.M. (A) 1132 of 2025 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 Kaliachak P.S. Case No.427 of 2023 dated 06.04.2023 under Sections 489B/489C of the Indian Penal Code.

In the matter of : Jahangir Sekh @ Sariful ... petitioner Mr. Tapan Datta Gupta, Mr. Parvej Anam.

...for the petitioner.

Mr. Shiladitya Banerjee, Mr. Sachit Talukdar.

...for the State.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner was not named in the FIR. His name was for the first time taken in the supplementary charge sheet. The petitioner is absolutely innocent and there are no admissible evidence appearing against him.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the case diary, opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits as follows. Besides the statement of the co-accused, there are statements of neighbours who had clearly said that the petitioner was involved in such illicit activity. That apart, there are call records between the petitioner and the co-accused at the relevant time which implicate the petitioner. Moreover, a proclamation has also been issued against the petitioner.

In view of the materials available in the case diary and the fact that a proclamation has also been issued against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

The application for anticipatory bail being CRM(A) 1132 of 2025 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.)