AVISHEK GUPTA@ABHISHEK KUMAR GUPTA SHUBHAM KUMAR vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL — CRM(A)/301/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 10th June 2026.
CNR: WBCHCJ0019802026
Filing Number
CRM(A)/305/2026
Filing Date
18-May-2026
Registration No
CRM(A)/301/2026
Registration Date
19-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)
Coram
Hon'ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
GROUP C (CRIMINAL MATTERS) ( 3 )
Sub-Category
Anticipatory Bail ( 3 )
Judicial Branch
CRIMINAL SECTION
Decision Date
10-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Last updated 11-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.AVISHEK GUPTA@ABHISHEK KUMAR GUPTA SHUBHAM KUMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)View PDF
Case Summary: The High Court at Calcutta rejected the anticipatory bail application of Avishek Gupta, the primary accused in an assault case. Gupta allegedly led a group of 5-6 persons to assault the complainant's husband, causing multiple scalp injuries requiring stitches, facial injuries, and abrasions. The court found the severity of injuries—particularly head injuries substantiated by medical evidence—made this unsuitable for anticipatory bail, distinguishing Gupta from co-accused who were granted bail as they were not originally named in the FIR. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Jun-2026
Application For Anticipatory Bail
Hon'ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)
-
08-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)View PDF
-
20-May-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
18-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CRM(A)/301/2026
Case Summary: The High Court at Calcutta rejected the anticipatory bail application of Avishek Gupta, the primary accused in an assault case. Gupta allegedly led a group of 5-6 persons to assault the complainant's husband, causing multiple scalp injuries requiring stitches, facial injuries, and abrasions. The court found the severity of injuries—particularly head injuries substantiated by medical evidence—made this unsuitable for anticipatory bail, distinguishing Gupta from co-accused who were granted bail as they were not originally named in the FIR. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts