BANIK CH. ROY@BANIK RAY SANDIP GUHA ROY vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL — CRM(A)/306/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 10th June 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 08-Jun-2026

CNR: WBCHCJ0020122026

Filing Number

CRM(A)/311/2026

Filing Date

19-May-2026

Registration No

CRM(A)/306/2026

Registration Date

20-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

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BANIK CH. ROY@BANIK RAY SANDIP GUHA ROY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)View PDF

    The High Court at Calcutta rejected the anticipatory bail application of Banik Ch. Roy in connection with an alleged assault case involving stick and knife attacks that caused injuries to the victim's scalp and back. The court found the nature and severity of injuries combined with the weapons used warranted denial of anticipatory bail, despite a co-accused receiving bail from the trial court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Jun-2026

    Application For Anticipatory Bail

    Hon'ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)

  4. 08-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)View PDF

  5. 08-Jun-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 19-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM(A)/306/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court at Calcutta rejected the anticipatory bail application of Banik Ch. Roy in connection with an alleged assault case involving stick and knife attacks that caused injuries to the victim's scalp and back. The court found the nature and severity of injuries combined with the weapons used warranted denial of anticipatory bail, despite a co-accused receiving bail from the trial court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case