Dismissed¶18

Md. Ehesan @ Ashan and Ors. v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC22 Jan 2026CRM (A)/4425/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail; second application; maintainability; no material change in circumstances; injury report; eye injury; dressing and sutures; order sheet 11.09.2025; charge sheet; Harishchandrapur P.S. Case No. 609 of 2025; BNS Act 2023 Sections 109, 117(2), 118(1), 329(4), 351(3), 76, 232, 3(5); Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 Section 482; CRM (A) 4425 of 2025; Jay Sengupta, J.; rejected as not maintainable.

What did the court decide?

An opinion of the particular doctor while preparing the injury report, that too making it subject to medical reports, can hardly be a ground for entertaining a second prayer for anticipatory bail. ¶13

Md. Ehesan @ Ashan and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal — Anticipatory Bail | Calcutta HC (2026)

¶1

22.01.2026 Court No.28 Item No.73 tbsr Reject

¶2

CRM (A) 4425 of 2025

¶3

In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Harishchandrapur P.S. Case No. 609 of 2025 dated 20.06.2025 under Sections 109, 117(2), 118(1), 329(4), 351(3), 76, 232, 3(5) of the BNS Act, 2023.

¶4

And

¶5

In the matter of: Md. Ehesan @ Ashan & Ors.

¶6

….Petitioners.

¶7

Mr. Sagar Saha

¶8

Ms. Nayana Mukhopadhyay …for the petitioners

¶9

Ms. Sujata Das Md. Ejaz Akhtar ….for the State

¶10

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that this is a second application for anticipatory bail. Earlier, this Court rejected the anticipatory bail application of the petitioners based on a submission made by the State that the injury report showed infliction of injury on the eye which required dressing and sutures. However, after collecting the copy of the injury report, it appears the doctor opined that the injury was clinically not so serious.

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the State.

¶12

The submission made on behalf of the State earlier, that there was an injury on the eye, which required dressing and sutures is not negated.

¶13

An opinion of the particular doctor while preparing the injury report, that too making it subject to medical reports, can hardly be a ground for entertaining a second prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶14

¶15

Moreover, at the conclusion as present in the order sheet dated 11.09.2025, it was clearly recorded that “considering the above and other incriminating materials available in the case diary,” the application for anticipatory bail was rejected.

¶16

The facts remain the same. There is no substantial change in the circumstance. In fact, the sections under which the FIR was registered and investigation was going on also remained the same in the charge sheet.

¶17

Therefore, I do not find any material change in circumstances to warrant entertaining of a second application for anticipatory bail.

¶18

Accordingly, the same is rejected as not maintainable.

¶19

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.

¶20

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

Md. Ehesan @ Ashan and Ors. v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Ehesan @ Ashan and Ors. v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukul Ansari @ Mukul Momin and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal

Lakshmi Saila Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Apurba Biswas @ Apurba Kumar Biswas Vs the State of West Bengal

Mabud Khan Vs the State of West Bengal

Anarul Sk. Vs State of West Bengal

Anik Biswas Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.