Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 482
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 3(5), 61(2), 316(3), 318(4)
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is rejected.
Judgment
Mr. Supriyo Das Mr. Aniket Mitra Mr. Sarthak Mondal …for the petitioner. …for the State.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is only a broker who arranged for truck for transportation. He was in no way connected with the delivery of goods. He has been falsely implicated in this case. One co-accused was granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court while the application for anticipatory bail for two others was rejected by this Court.
Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that the petitioner is standing substantially on a similar footing as one Sadrul Khan @ Raja whose application anticipatory bail was rejected by a coordinate Bench of this Court on 11.8.2025 in CRM (A) 2717 of 2025. Besides, the statement of a co-accused, there are phone 2 call records of the petitioner with the principal accused. The petitioner also has a criminal antecedent.
Considering the incriminating materials available in the case diary including the phone call records with a co- accused and the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, I do not consider this to be a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is rejected.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with requisite formalities. (Jay Sengupta, J.) 2
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.