Calcutta High CourtCRM (A)/3158/2025rejected

Rejjak Ali @ Haji Rejjak Sk And ORS. v. State Of West Bengal

2025-11-04Hon'Ble Justice Jay Sengupta2 pages

04.11.2025 Court No.28 Item No.23 ssi CRM (A) 3158 of 2025 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Suraksha Nagarik Sanhita in connection with Kandi Police Station Case No. 673 of 2023 dated 11.11.2023 under Section 341/326/307/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

And In the matter of: Rejjak Ali @ Haji Rejjak Sk & others. ....Applicants/Petitioners Mr. Kallol Kumar Basu Md. Jannat Ul Firdous ...for the petitioners Mr. Md. Adil Badr Ms. Debjani Sahu ..for the State Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that during pendency of this application, the petitioner no.2 has been arrested. As such, the application is not pressed, so far as he is concerned.

Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is dismissed as not pressed, so far as the petitioner no.2 is concerned. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners further submits as follows. The petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. However, so far as the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 are concerned, it is alleged that they assaulted the victim with a lathi. The petitioner no.4 is alleged to have assaulted the victim with a knife.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He refers to the injury report and the statements of witnesses. He also submits that the petitioners had earlier filed an application for anticipatory bail before this Court which was dismissed as not

pressed. This makes it a second application for anticipatory bail, which is not maintainable. In any event, proclamation has been issued against all the petitioners.

Considering the incriminating materials available in the case diary, that proclamation has been issued against the petitioners and the fact that this is a second application without any substantial change in circumstance, I do not consider this is to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)