Swapan Kumar Pradhan v. State Of West Bengal
17.06.2026 Sl. No. 38 AMR Ct.No.28 CRM(A) 1575 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023.
And In the matter of : Sri Swapan Kumar Pradhan .... Petitioner Mr. Sudipta Moitra Mr. Vijay Verma ...for the Petitioner Mr. Ayan Basu Mr. Sumit Routh Ms. Sayani Das ...for the de-facto complainant Mr. Somnath Bera ...for the State Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner had regular business transactions with one 'Sneha Lime Suppliers'. In connection with such transactions, he had given some blank cheques to the proprietor of the concern. The proprietor of 'Sneha Lime Suppliers' was the mother of the proprietor of another firm with the name 'Bera Agro Traders'. Certain blank cheques were given in connection with the transactions with 'Sneha Lime Suppliers'. The transactions with the 'Sneha Lime Suppliers' had been there since 2015. These cheques were misused and converted into payable cheques in relation to
alleged transactions with 'Bera Agro Traders'. Over the self same cause of action as in the present FIR, criminal cases were filed under the Negotiable Instruments Act for the alleged dishonour of the said cheques. Moreover, the petitioner had responded to the notices issued under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with present case. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defacto complainant strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that cheques to the tune of huge amounts were dishonoured by the petitioner.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He refers to the FIR, the statements of the witnesses and copy of ledger present in the case diary.
Considering the above, the other materials available in the case diary and that there are pending cases under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act over the dishonour of the cheques in question, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and
on further condition that the petitioner shall not threaten or intimate witnesses, shall co-operate with investigation and shall meet the I.O. once a fortnight till submission of report in final form.
The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all formalities. .
(Jay Sengupta, J.)