Harishkumar Sukhabhai Pandya @ Harishbhai Sukhbhai Pandaya v. State Of West Bengal

06/01/2026 D/L - 33 Court No.28 S. Kundu Rejected C.R.M.(A) 4089 of 2025 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023. In connection with Kanksa P.S case no.

dated 23/9/2025 under Sections 126(2)/319(2)/310(2)/317(3) of the BNS.

In the matter of: Harishkumar Sukhabhai Pandya @ Harishbhai Sukhabhai Pandaya

...Petitioner.

Mr. Amajit De Mr. Jagaram Mahato ...for the petitioner.

Ms. Sonali Das Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury ...for the State.

1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been made accused in the charge-sheet filed during the pendency of this application. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. She submits that although the petitioner has not been named as an accused in the charge-sheet, further investigation has been prayed for as against him and others. There are prima facie materials available in the case diary implicating the present petitioner. First, there are call records between the petitioner and the principal accused. Secondly, there are statements of employee of a courier company which indicate that money to the tune of lakhs

of rupees was transferred by way of Hawala transaction to the present petitioner. She also submits that the dacoity in question involved a total sum of Rs.3 Crores.

3. Considering the above and the other incriminating materials available in the case diary, I do not consider this to be a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is rejected.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)