Koushik Karmakar vs State of West Bengal — 237/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 18th April 2026.

Case disposed

Criminal Misc.

CNR: WBHG010005482026

Filing Number

360/2026

Filing Date

12-Feb-2026

Registration No

237/2026

Registration Date

12-Feb-2026

Court

Disrtrict and Sessions Judge, Hooghly

Judge

1-District Judge

Decision Date

18-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 25-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Koushik Karmakar

    Adv. Kunal Dutta

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of West Bengal

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Apr-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    Summary The Sessions Judge, Hooghly granted anticipatory bail to petitioner Koushik Karmakar in a case involving alleged criminal breach of trust (BNSS sections 316(2)/318(4)). The court found insufficient prima facie evidence that the accused received the alleged sum of Rs. 78,431 from the complainant, noting no documentary proof of receipt and suspicious gaps in the complainant's own records. The petitioner was directed to furnish a bond of Rs. 3,000 with one surety of equal amount upon arrest. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    District Judge

  4. 30-Mar-2026

    Hearing of Bail Petition/Petition

    District Judge

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Hearing of Bail Petition/Petition

    District Judge

  6. 26-Feb-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  7. 26-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 12-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 237/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Sessions Judge, Hooghly granted anticipatory bail to petitioner Koushik Karmakar in a case involving alleged criminal breach of trust (BNSS sections 316(2)/318(4)). The court found insufficient prima facie evidence that the accused received the alleged sum of Rs. 78,431 from the complainant, noting no documentary proof of receipt and suspicious gaps in the complainant's own records. The petitioner was directed to furnish a bond of Rs. 3,000 with one surety of equal amount upon arrest. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case