Souvanik Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal and Anr. — Anticipatory Bail | Calcutta HC (2026)

Souvanik Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal and Anr. — Anticipatory Bail | Calcutta HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted under Section 482 BNSS: in the event of arrest, release on bail on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one local), to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to Section 438(2) CrPC / Section 482(2) BNSS conditions and further conditions of cooperation with investigation, weekly meeting with the investigating officer till final report, no social media circulation of the alleged victim's photographs/videos, and no threatening or intimidating of witnesses.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, arraigned in Shyampukur P.S. Case No.141 of 2025 under Sections 308(2)/316(2)/64/69/89 of the BNS, 2023, is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Court's answer

Considering the materials in the case diary and the fact that there was some kind of relation between the two adults for a considerable period of time, custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not required and the court was inclined to grant anticipatory bail.

Ratio / Principle

In the event of arrest, the petitioner is to 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 the Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC / Section 482(2) BNSS and further conditions: cooperation with the investigation, meeting the investigating officer once a week till submission of report in final form, not circulating or uploading any photograph or video of the alleged victim on social media, and not threatening or intimidating witnesses.

Key takeaways

The application for anticipatory bail is allowed.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 granted in a case registered as Shyampukur P.S. Case No.141 of 2025 under Sections 308(2)/316(2)/64/69/89 of the BNS, 2023, arising out of a relationship between two consenting adults that turned sour. The State opposed, relying on witness statements including the alleged victim's statement recorded before the learned Magistrate, alleging a promise to divorce and marry the victim, two abortions (with no medical documents yet available), and an apprehension of circulation of the victim's photographs/videos on social media. Holding that custodial interrogation was not required given the relationship between the two adults over a considerable period, the court granted anticipatory bail: bond of Rs.10,000/- with two like sureties (one local), subject to Section 438(2) CrPC / Section 482(2) BNSS conditions and further conditions of cooperation with investigation, weekly meetings with the investigating officer till final report, non-circulation of the victim's photographs/videos on social media, and non-intimidation of witnesses. (Jay Sengupta, J.)

AD 10 March 11, 2026 Ct. 28 SG CRM(A) 272 of 2026 Allowed An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Shyampukur P.S. Case No.141 of 2025 dated 03.09.2025 under Sections 308(2)/316(2)/64/69/89 of the BNS, 2023. And In the matter of: Souvanik Ghosh … petitioner Mr. Avik Ghatak Ms. Dishani Kanjilal … for the petitioner Mr. Bibaswan Bhattacharya Mr. Bikram Mitra … for the State Mr. Arani Bhattacharya … for the de facto complainant

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is admitted in the FIR that there was a relationship between two consenting adults. After the relationship turned sour, the FIR was lodged.

Learned counsel for the de facto complainant strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail, relies on the statements of witnesses, including that of the alleged victim recorded before the learned Magistrate. It is alleged that the two got acquainted since 2024 as they were engaged in the same profession of real estate brokerage. It was also alleged that the petitioner promised to divorce his wife, so that he could marry the

2

alleged victim. Upon such promise, they entered into a relationship and the alleged victim aborted her foetus twice. There is also an apprehension on the part of the victim that the petitioner might circulate photographs and video recordings of the victim on social media. However, there is no medical document available as of now regarding such abortions.

Considering the above, the other materials available in the case diary and the fact that there was some kind of relation between the two adults for a considerable period of time, 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/- (rupees ten thousand) 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 the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023 and on the further conditions that the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation, shall meet the investigating officer once a week till submission of report in final form, shall not circulate or upload any photograph or video of the alleged victim on the social media and shall not threaten or intimidate witnesses.

3

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed.

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

(Jay Sengupta, J.)