Dismissed¶¶17

Manish Prasad Sah v. the State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC6 Jan 2026CRM(A)/851/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail dismissed; High Court at Calcutta Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri; CRM (A) 851 of 2025; Tirthankar Ghosh, J.; Manish Prasad Sah; Section 438 CrPC; Section 482 BNSS; Sections 126(2)/117(2)/109/3(5) BNS 2023; Pradhan Nagar Police Station Case No. 531 of 2025; statement of injured; Section 183 BNSS statement in Case Diary; CCTV footage; co-accused granted bail; Kushal Sha.

What did the court decide?

From the statement of the injured, the petitioner's complicity has been narrated along with the other accused persons who were taken into custody. ¶¶16

Manish Prasad Sah Vs the State of West Bengal — Anticipatory Bail | Calcutta HC (2026)

¶1

06.01.2026 Item no. 06. Court No.3. Rakib

¶2

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

¶3

CRM (A) 851 of 2025

¶4

In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Pradhan Nagar Police Station Case No. 531 of 2025 dated 31.07.2025 under Sections 126(2)/117(2)/109/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶5

And

¶6

In the matter of : Manish Prasad Sah.

¶7

……Petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Subham Ghosh Mr. Mayank Roy

¶9

……for the Petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Tapan Bhattacharjee Mr. Chattu Roy

¶11

……for the State.

¶12

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits

¶13

that CCTV footages do not reflect the petitioner’s presence at the place of occurrence and the same was taken into account by the learned ACJM. To that effect certified copies of the order-sheets have been placed in respect of the other accused persons who have been granted bail. Learned advocate has also referred to the forwarding report of the investigating officer before the learned Magistrate to emphasize on the fact that the present petitioner was not at all involved as the investigating officer has specifically stated regarding involvement of one Kushal Sha.

¶14

¶15

Learned advocate for the State has produced the Case Diary and brought to the notice of the Court to the statement under Section 183 of the BNSS.

¶16

I find from the statement of the injured that the petitioner’s complicity has been narrated along with other accused persons who were taken into custody. Having regard to the evidentiary value of the statement of an injured, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for the privilege to be granted as prayed for by the petitioner.

¶17

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner being CRA (A) 851 of 2025 is dismissed.

¶18

All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶19

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

¶20

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

Manish Prasad Sah v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Prasad Sah v. the 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

Chaitanya Barman and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal

Alka Barman @ Aloka Roy Vs the State of West Bengal

Md. Rubel Vs the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Tarit Barman Vs the State of West Bengal

Tinku Das Vs the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Abdul Hossain Ali@Hossain Miya@Abdul Hossain Vs the State of West Bengal