Giyasuddin Mallick @ Giyasuddin Mullick @ Giyas Uddin Mullic v. State Of West Bengal

22.12.2025 Sl. No.71 NB CRM (A) 4058 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 Chanditala PS Case No.485/2025 dated June25, 2025 under Sections 109/ 126(2)/ 115(2)/ 117(2)/ 118(2)/ 3(5)/ 303(2)/ 329(4)/ 351(3)/ 352/ 76 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023. And In the matter of: Giyasuddin Mallick @ Giyasuddin Mullick @ Giys Uddin Mullic ... petitioner Mr. Navanil De, Mr. Shoumilya Majumder.

...for the petitioner.

Ms. Shreyashee Biswas, Mr. Santanu Talukdar.

...for the State.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. This petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. A co-accused was granted anticipatory bail by this Court earlier. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. She submits that the present petitioner namely Giyasuddin is not standing on the same footing as the coaccused, namely Jahiruddin, who was granted anticipatory bail earlier. According to the statement of an injured witness recorded before the learned Magistrate, it was Giyasuddin, who had inflicted injury on the prime victim, Afrina with a "Hesho". The injury report of the said Afrina shows inflicting of injury that required ten stitches. Considering the above and the other incriminating materials available in the case diary, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail.

The application for anticipatory bail 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.)