25.08.2026 Court No.35. D/L.58. Rakib (Rejected) CRM (A) 2754 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Raghunathganj Police Station case no. 193 of 2024 dated 25.02.2024 under Sections 143/ 144/ 147/ 148/ 149/ 325/ 326/ 307 /427 /120B /34 of the Indian Penal Code. And In the matter of : Sufu Sk @ Sukuruddin Shaikh @ Suku Sk. ……Petitioner. Mr. Tapodip Gupta Mr. Suman Bhanja .....for the Petitioner. Mr. D. Bhattacharjee Mr. Arka N. ……for the State. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that there has been change of circumstances as some of the accused persons have been granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge, as such, petitioner be released on anticipatory bail. Learned advocate appearing for the State submits that the present is the second application for anticipatory bail. Having considered the fact that the events pointed out by the petitioner do not make out a case for fresh application of mind in view of the earlier observations made in CRM (A) 3340 of 2025, I am not inclined to grant the prayer sought for. Accordingly, CRM (A) 2754 of 2026 is dismissed. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. 2 Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

25.08.2026 Court No.35. D/L.58. Rakib (Rejected) CRM (A) 2754 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Raghunathganj Police Station case no. 193 of 2024 dated 25.02.2024 under Sections 143/ 144/ 147/ 148/ 149/ 325/ 326/ 307 /427 /120B /34 of the Indian Penal Code. And In the matter of : Sufu Sk @ Sukuruddin Shaikh @ Suku Sk. ……Petitioner. Mr. Tapodip Gupta Mr. Suman Bhanja .....for the Petitioner. Mr. D. Bhattacharjee Mr. Arka N. ……for the State. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that there has been change of circumstances as some of the accused persons have been granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge, as such, petitioner be released on anticipatory bail. Learned advocate appearing for the State submits that the present is the second application for anticipatory bail. Having considered the fact that the events pointed out by the petitioner do not make out a case for fresh application of mind in view of the earlier observations made in CRM (A) 3340 of 2025, I am not inclined to grant the prayer sought for. Accordingly, CRM (A) 2754 of 2026 is dismissed. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. 2 Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)