Calcutta High CourtCRM (A)/1263/2026rejected

Subrata Maity v. State Of West Bengal

2026-05-11Hon'Ble Justice Jay Sengupta2 pages

11.05.2026 Court No.28 Item No.43 ssi CRM (A) 1263 of 2026 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Suraksha Nagarik Sanhita in connection with Patuli Police Station Case No. 660 of 2025 dated 27.12.2025 under Sections 137

(2) adding Section 140 (3) of the BNS, 2023.

And In the matter of: Subrata Maity.

.... Petitioner Mr. Debajyoti Deb Mr. Harshwardhan Kr. Jha ...for the petitioner Mr. Soumya Nag Mr. Rajib Ghosh ...for the de facto Mr. Krishnendu Bhattacharjee Mr. Koustav Lal Mukherjee ...for the State Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The victim is the nine year old son of the informant. The petitioner is a former employee. When the petitioner came to know that the little child wanted to go to Park Street to see the lights, his associate took him out and dropped him back at a place. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de facto complainant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that the child went missing in the evening of 26.12.2025. The informant approached the police. However, initially no FIR was registered. The child's cycle was found abandoned near a road. The entire area was, however, cordoned off after the FIR was registered. Possibly that is the reason the petitioner could not take away the child. He was dropped at an abandoned place and was recovered from there.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the statements of the victim, who, among other things, stated that the two men present in the taxi took away his watch and the driver paid them money to make them go away. Reliance is also placed on the statement of another witness who found the boy at the abandoned place.

Considering the above and the other incriminating materials available in the case diary, 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.)