Rajesh Chirimar v. State Of West Bengal

05.06.2026 Sl. No. 146 Ct. No. 2 SG [REJECTED] C. R. M. (A) 1543 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with G.R. Case No. 662 of 2026 arising out of Bidhannagar North Police Station Case No. 83/2026 dated 25.05.2026 under Section 308(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. And In Re: Rajesh Chirimar.

... ... Petitioner Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, Sr. Adv.

Mr. S. Ahmed, Mr. S. Mohapatra, Mr. A. Mukherjee, Mrs. M. Mukherjee.

... ... for the petitioner Mr. Krishnendu Bhattacharya, ld. A.P.P.

Mr. Sankalpa Bhattacharjee.

... ... for the State 1.

Apprehending arrest in connection with the complaint lodged against the present petitioner who was the erstwhile councillor, the instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed.

2.

The submission advanced before this Court by the learned Senior Advocate that the entire allegation levelled against him because of the change of political regime since the complaint disclosed about commission of offence alleged where apparently no specific role has been attributed. It is further submitted that the petitioner is suffering from various ailments and left to Delhi for the purpose of treatment. Moreover, he is not involved with the case and the entire fact is concocted.

3.

Learned Counsel for the prosecution raised objections and submits that there are sufficient materials against the present petitioner and grant of anticipatory bail would frustrate the process of investigation.

4.

Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and on careful perusal of the materials on record, it is found that the complaint has been lodged on 25.05.2026. Petitioner has received 35(3) of the BNSS notice and it is not yet complied. Resignation was given after the change of political power. The reasonable apprehension of the witness being influenced cannot be ruled out as he was the councilor for a long period. 5.

Hence, this Court is of the view that grant of anticipatory bail at this stage might have an adverse impact in the course of investigation. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to allow the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. 6.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, rejected. [Chaitali Chatterjee (Das), J.]