Priyangu Pandey v. State Of West Bengal

10.09.2025 Court No.28 Item No.13 ssi CRM (A) 2953 of 2025 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Suraksha Nagarik Sanhita in connection with New Market PS Case No.136 of 2025 dated 09.08.2025 under Sections 109 (1)/121 (2)/3 (5) of the BNS 2023.

And In the matter of: Priyangu Pandey ....Applicant/Petitioner.

Mr. Moyukh Mukherjee Mr. Koustav Bagchi Mr. Koustav Lal Mukherjee Ms. Sarmistha Basak ...for the petitioner Mr. Kalyan Bandyopadhyay, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Rudradipta Nandi, Ld. APP Ms. Pramiti Bandyopadhyay Mr. Arka Kumar Nag Mr. Nahid Ahmed Mr. Ratikanta Pal ...for the State Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is a political activist belonging to the opposition political party. He was a part of a demonstration and march that was to proceed to Nabanna protesting against the unfortunate death of a doctor at the R.G. Kar Hospital. The petitioner and other activists were intercepted at the Dorina crossing and then they were prevented from going beyond a point. The petitioner and others were assaulted. However, no grievous injuries were received by any of the parties.

Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the State strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that the petitioner and others had attacked the police personnel and injured

them. Reliance is placed on the statements of the witnesses and the medical reports and the photographs.

From the statement of two prime witnesses contained at pages 18 and 21 of the case diary, it appears that the witnesses did not know the names of the assailants and could get those names only from conversations between the participants in the march. Surprisingly, they gave out the full names of the petitioner and some other alleged accused.

Considering the above and the fact that there are allegations and counter allegations and the alleged role ascribed to the present petitioner, I do not think that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required and I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is allowed.

However, 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 the Arresting Officer and also be subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023 and on further conditions that the petitioner shall not threaten or intimidate witnesses and shall co-operate with investigation. The petitioner shall meet the I.O. as and when required.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. (Jay Sengupta, J.)