Debabrata Bhattacharjee v. State Of West Bengal

19/06/2026 D/L - 33 Court No.28 S. Kundu Allowed C.R.M.(A) 1548 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023. In connection with Barasat P.S case no. 96 of 2026 dated 01/03/2026 under Sections 126(2)/115(2)/351(2)/3(5) of the BNS read with Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act.

In the matter of: Debabrata Bhattacharjee

...Petitioner.

Mr. Shibaji Das Ms. Deblina De ...for the petitioner.

Mr. Debasis Kar Mr. Arka Tilak Bhadra ...for the de-facto complainant.

Mr. Anurag Sardar ...for the State.

1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner happens to be a client of the wife of the de-facto complainant. Both the de-facto complainant and his wife are lawyers. However, a matrimonial discord has developed between the de-facto complainant and his wife. Since then, whoever becomes the client of the wife of the de-facto complainant, the defacto complainant would go after him or her. The present FIR was accordingly lodged against the petitioner. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner has various civil and other cases for which he regularly consults the wife of the de-facto complainant.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de-facto complainant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He

submits that there are criminal antecedents of the present petitioner.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the State relies on the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He refers to the FIR and the statements of witnesses and some pictures of Whatsapp messages sent by the petitioner as supplied by the de-facto complainant. Some of them include pictures of arms and bullets. However, there is no injury report present in the case diary. He also refers to the statement of the wife of the de-facto complainant recorded by the Police.

4. Considering the above and the other materials available in the case diary, I do not think that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required in this case and I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, in view of the allegations levelled, the movement of the petitioner shall remain restricted for a limited period.

5. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and also be subject to further conditions that the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and shall not threaten or intimidate the witnesses. The petitioner shall meet the I.O once a week till submission of report in final form. The petitioner shall stay outside the jurisdiction of

Barasat Police Station for a period of three months except for meeting the I.O or attending the jurisdictional Court.

6. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is allowed.

7. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with requisite formalities.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)