✦ Calcutta High Court

KALIACHAK PS CASE No. 1573 of 2025 · Calcutta High Court

KALIACHAK PS CASE No. 1573 of 2025JAY SENGUPTA

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Mr. Avinaba Patra …for the petitioner. Ms. Zareen N. Khan, Mr. Sufi Kamal. …for the State. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The de facto complainant’s brother met with a motorbike accident with a lady. The lady filed an FIR against the said brother. The said brother was thereafter allegedly assaulted by the present petitioner and two others. Those other co-accused were granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Court. No grievous injury has been caused to anyone. Charge sheet has been submitted. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. She refers to the injury report which, however, does not show infliction of any grievous injury. She also relies on the statements of the victim and other witnesses. Considering the above, the other materials available in the case diary, the fact that the injury report does not show infliction of 2 any grievous injury and the fact that charge sheet has already been submitted, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present petitioner. Accordingly, 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 Arresting Officer and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and on further condition that the petitioner shall not threaten or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever and shall surrender before learned jurisdictional Court and pray for bail within four weeks from this date and shall attend the jurisdictional Court regularly. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. 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.)

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Calcutta High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. KALIACHAK PS CASE No. 1573 of 2025). ← Search more judgments