Gourab Chandra Pal @ Gawrab Chandra Pal @ Gourab Pal v. State Of West Bengal

14.08.2025 Item No.18 Ct. No. 446 PG C.R.M.(A) 2779 of 2025 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Kandi Police Station Case No. 344 of 2025 dated 11.07.2025 under Sections 126(2)/117(2)/74/109(1)/303(2)/3(5)) of the Bharatiya Naya Sanhita, pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kandi, Murshidabad. And In the matter of : Gourab Chandra Pal @ Gawrab Chandra Pal @Gourab Pal ...... petitioner Mr. Kallol Kr. Basu Md. Jannat ul Firdours Mr. Rajsekhar Hota ....for the petitioner Ms. Manisha Sharma Mr. Monoranjan Mahata ....for the State Mr. Pratip Kr. Chatterjee Ms. Maitrayee Chatterjee....for the de facto complainant

1. It is submitted by the learned Prosecution that as per report of S.I. of Police, the present petitioner along with other coaccused persons have been suspended by the disciplinary committee.

2. Learned advocate for the petitioner on the other hand submitted that despite that an admit card has been issued in his favour, if the anticipatory bail is not granted to the petitioner, his career will be ruined.

3. Heard the submissions of both the learned advocates.

4. Perused the materials in the case diary and the role attributed by the present petitioner which emanated from an incident of ragging within the college premises, the nature

and seriousness of the allegation which prima facie shows the existence of incriminating materials.

5. It is a mandate of the statute that an anticipatory bail may be granted in exceptional circumstances but in this case, this Court finds no such sufficient reason for extending the benefit of section 482(2) of BNSS in favour of the petitioner. Hence the prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected.

6. At this stage, since the admit card has been issued in favour of the petitioner, direction is given to the concerned authorities that in the event of arrest, the facilities should be given to the petitioner in order to enable him to appear for the examination on the scheduled date. However, the authority must take all appropriate measures so that the interest of the de facto complainant or his daughter is not hampered or the daughter of the de facto complainant does not feel unprotected.

7. In view of the above, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

(Chaitali Chatterjee (Das), J.)