Soumen Mishra Vs State of West Bengal — Anticipatory Bail | Calcutta HC (2026)

Soumen Mishra Vs State of West Bengal — Anticipatory Bail | Calcutta HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: in the event of arrest, the petitioner to be released on furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one of whom must be local), to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to conditions that the petitioner cooperate with the investigation, not threaten or intimidate witnesses, and meet the Investigating Officer once a week till submission of report in final form.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, Soumen Mishra, is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with Anandapur P.S. case no. 91 of 2024 under Sections 408/420 of the IPC. +1 more

Court's answer

The only material available against the petitioner is the statement of the co-accused, and even the allegations made therein can best be the subject-matter of another FIR.

Ratio / Principle

Considering the other materials in the case diary and the alleged role ascribed to the petitioner, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required.

Key takeaways

The application for anticipatory bail is allowed.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Miscellaneous (Anticipatory Bail) — Section 482, BNSS, 2023 — application in connection with Anandapur P.S. Case No. 91 of 2024 dated 23/04/2024 under Sections 408/420, IPC. The FIR arose from a complaint alleging that money handed to Jhareswar Pan for deposit with a landlord towards purchase of property was never deposited; the principal accused Jhareswar Pan's own anticipatory bail application had earlier been rejected by this Court, and his statement was that he had given some money to the present petitioner for obtaining a job. Held: the only material against the petitioner was the statement of the co-accused, and those allegations could best form the subject-matter of another FIR; custodial interrogation was not required. Anticipatory bail granted on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one local), to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, conditioned on cooperation with investigation, abstention from threatening or intimidating witnesses, and weekly meetings with the Investigating Officer until submission of the final report. (Jay Sengupta, J.)

13/05/2026 D/L – 11 Court No.28 S. Kundu Allowed

C.R.M.(A) 1183 of 2026

In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023. In connection with Anandapur P.S case no. 91 of 2024 dated 23/04/2024 under Sections 408/420 of the IPC.

In the matter of: Soumen Mishra ...Petitioner. Mr. Amit Ranjan Pati Ms. Swastika Chowdhury Ms. Khadijatul Kubra Ms. Ilika Nag Mr. Avijit Chatterjee …for the petitioner. Mr. Krishnendu Bhattacharyya Mr. Tapodip Gupta … Amicus. 1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner was not named in the FIR. The FIR was registered by filing a complaint before a learned Magistrate. It is alleged in the complaint that the de-facto complainant had given some money to one Jhareswar Pan so that the same could be transmitted and deposited with the landlord of a property with an ultimate aim purchasing of such property pursuant to an agreement. However, later he found that no such money was deposited by the said Jhareswar Pan with the landlord. The petitioner is not at all connected with the alleged offence.

...Petitioner. …for the petitioner. … Amicus.

Learned Amicus assisting the State relies on the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He

2

submits that the anticipatory bail application of the principal accused, namely, Jhareswar Pan was rejected by this Court. According to the statement of the said Jhareswar Pan, he had given some money to the present petitioner for obtaining a job.

Therefore, it appears that the only material available against the petitioner is the statement of the co-accused. Even the allegations made therein can best be the subject-matter of another FIR.

Considering the above, the other materials available in the case diary and the alleged role ascribed to the present petitioner, I do not think that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required in this case and I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on

bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and also be subject to further conditions that the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and shall not threaten or intimidate the witnesses. The petitioner shall meet the Investigating Officer once a week till submission of report in final form.

Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is allowed.

3

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with requisite formalities.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)