Fulkumar Adhikary Vs the State of West Bengal — Anticipatory Bail | Calcutta HC (2026)

Fulkumar Adhikary Vs the State of West Bengal — Anticipatory Bail | Calcutta HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Warrant of arrest kept in abeyance for four weeks on the petitioner's undertaking to appear; on appearance within that period, the learned Magistrate to allow the petitioner to continue on the same bail and bond and recall the warrant of arrest; the anticipatory bail application CRM (A) 981 of 2025 treated as disposed of with no separate order; cause title permitted to be amended in respect of the police station.

Issue for consideration

Whether the warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner in connection with Boxirhat Police Station Case No. 68 of 2017 should be kept in abeyance and recalled if he appears before the learned Magistrate within four weeks. +1 more

Court's answer

The warrant of arrest issued by the learned A.C.J.M. Tufangunj is kept in abeyance for a period of four weeks, the petitioner having undertaken that he is ready and willing to appear before the learned Magistrate, his earlier non-appearance on the date fixed having been caused by miscommunication.

Ratio / Principle

If the petitioner appears within the period of four weeks, the learned Magistrate would allow the petitioner to continue on the same bail and bond and recall the warrant of arrest against him.

Key takeaways

In view of the order passed in CRR 30 of 2026, no order need be passed in the application for anticipatory bail being CRM (A) 981 of 2025, and the same is treated as disposed of.ratio¶21
Leave is granted to the petitioner's learned advocate to amend the Cause Title in respect of the police station, both in the revisional application and in the application for anticipatory bail.obiter¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Calcutta High Court, Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.), 16.01.2026 - CRR 30 of 2026 with CRM (A) 981 of 2025 (Fulkumar Adhikari v. The State of West Bengal & Anr.). Arrest warrants (issued 03.10.2024, re-issued 31.07.2025) in Boxirhat Police Station Case No. 68 of 2017 dated 28.04.2017, under Sections 417/376/506/34 IPC, were kept in abeyance for four weeks, the petitioner undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate, his earlier non-appearance being due to miscommunication. On appearance within the period, the learned Magistrate is to allow the petitioner to continue on the same bail and bond and recall the warrant of arrest. The anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC 1973 / Section 482 BNSS 2023 was treated as disposed of, no separate order being called for. Leave was granted to amend the cause title in respect of the police station.

16.01.2026 Item nos. 2 &21. Court No.3. Rakib

In the High Court at Calcutta Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri

CRR 30 of 2026

Fulkumar Adhikary VS The State of West Bengal & Anr.

With

CRM (A) 981 of 2025

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 Boxirhat Police Station Case No. 68 of 2017 dated 28.04.2017 under Sections 417/376/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

And

In the matter of : Fulkumar Adhikari.

……Petitioner.

Mr. Satarudriya Mukherjee Ms. Tannu Agarwal ……for the Petitioner (in both matters). Mr. Aditi Sarkar Chakraborty, Ld. APP Mr. Kallol Acharjee Mr. Sagnik Sankar Sikdar

…..for the State (in both matters).

Leave is granted to the learned advocate for the petitioner

to amend the Cause Title in respect of the police station, both in the revisional application as well as the application for anticipatory bail.

Petitioner has approached this Court as warrant of arrest was issued on 03.10.2024 and re-issued on 31.07.2025 in

2

connection with Boxirhat Police Station case no. 68 of 2017 dated 28.04.2017.

The warrant of arrest issued by the learned A.C.J.M. Tufangunj be kept in abeyance for a period of four weeks as the petitioner undertakes that he is ready and willing to appear before the learned Magistrate and because of miscommunication he could not appear on the date so fixed.

In case the petitioner appears within the period of four weeks, learned Magistrate would allow the petitioner to continue on the same bail and bond and recall the warrant of arrest against him.

With the aforesaid observations CRR 30 of 2026 is disposed of.

In view of the aforesaid order being passed, no order need be passed in the application for anticipatory bail being CRM (A) 981 of 2025, he same be treated as disposed of.

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

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

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)