Chandan Bakshi @ Chandan Boxi And ANR v. The State Of West Bengal

17.11.2025 Sl. No.35 NB CRM (A) 3504 of 2025 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Panskura PS Case No.239/2025 dated 11.03.2025 under Sections 137(2)/87/3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

And In the matter of: Chandan Bakshi @ Chandan Boxi & Anr. ... petitioners Mr. Angshuman Chakraborty, Mr. S. S. Saha, Mr. Banshi Bandan Maity.

...for the petitioners.

Ms. Zareen Khan, Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury.

...for the State.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows. The petitioner no.1 is a psychiatric patient and the petitioner no.2 is his mother.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He relies on the case diary, especially on the statement of the 13 year old victim girl. According to such statement, the 13 year old victim girl was initially proposed by the 27 year old petitioner no.1 to go out with him. She refused. After that, the petitioners deceitfully asked her to go to their native place. There, they took away her mobile phone and confined her for six days. They were trying to force the victim girl to get married to the petitioner no.1.

Considering the incriminating materials available in the case diary and the alleged roles ascribed to each of the petitioners, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the present petitioners.

The application for anticipatory bail being CRM (A) 3504 of 2025 is, thus, rejected.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order may be delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all formalities.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)