Disposed¶18

Mithu Barman @ Madan Chandra Barman v. the State of West Bengal

Anticipatory bail – Repeat application

Calcutta HC19 Mar 2026CRM(A)/164/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

C.R.M (A) 164 of 2026, Calcutta High Court (Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri), Jay Sengupta, J., decided 19.03.2026 - anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC / Section 482 BNSS; held that a person already granted anticipatory bail cannot pray for it again; second application made under misconception of law and its rejection by the Sessions Court on 26.06.2025 held non est in the eye of law; petitioner left free to seek appropriate relief before the concerned Court; application disposed of.

What did the court decide?

No anticipatory bail granted in this application; petitioner left at liberty to place his case before the concerned Court and pray for appropriate relief. ¶18

Mithu Barman @ Madan Chandra Barman Vs the State of West… — Anticipatory Bail | Calcutta HC (2026)

¶1

19.03.2026 Sl. No.20 Ct. 06 NB

¶2

Calcutta High Court In The Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction

¶3

C.R.M (A) 164 of 2026

¶4

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.

¶5

And

¶6

In the matter of: Mithu Barman @ Madan Chandra Barman

¶7

… petitioner

¶8

Mr. Sudip Guha Roy, Mr. Ananda Paul. …for the petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, Mr. Ujjwal Luksom. ….for the State.

¶10

Report filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.

¶11

It appears from the report that the present petitioner, Madan Chandra Barman is the same person as Mithu Barman, as recorded in the FIR.

¶12

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Court on 04.06.2024 in Bail Petition No.749 of 2024. Subsequently, a charge sheet was submitted. As the name appearing in the charge sheet was Mithu Barman and not Madan Chandra Barman, the petitioner became apprehensive and decided to move another application for anticipatory bail. But, the same was rejected by the learned Sessions Court on 26.06.2025. The petitioner prays for anticipatory bail before this Court.

¶13

Heard the learned counsel for the State.

¶14

¶15

Once the petitioner was allowed the relief of anticipatory bail, he cannot again pray for anticipatory bail. In fact, the petitioner had prayed for anticipatory bail for the second time before the learned Sessions Court under misconception of law. The said order of rejection would thus be non est in the eye of law.

¶16

The petitioner shall be at liberty to place his case before the concerned Court and pray for appropriate relief.

¶17

No further order need be passed in the instant application for anticipatory bail.

¶18

With these observations and directions, the application for anticipatory bail is accordingly disposed of.

¶19

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.

¶20

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

Mithu Barman @ Madan Chandra Barman v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithu Barman @ Madan Chandra Barman v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Siddik Ali@Chhiddik Ali Vs the State of West Bengal

Alok Kumari Sinha@Alo Sinha Vs the State of West Bengal

Birendra Sharma Vs Kusum Sharma

Anjun Barman@Arjun Barman Vs the State of West Bengal

Saddam Sekh Vs the State of West Bengal

Asit Chakraborty and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal and Anr.