STATE OF WEST BENGAL vs PALASH SEN AND ANOTHER Advocate - KUSHAL ROY — 384/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 09th March 2026.

Case disposed

1.Criminal Misc. - Criminal Misc.

CNR: WBHW010010032026

Filing Number

601/2026

Filing Date

19-Feb-2026

Registration No

384/2026

Registration Date

19-Feb-2026

Court

District and Sessions Judge, Howrah

Judge

1-District Judge

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 20-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

30

Police Station

JAGACHA

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF WEST BENGAL

    Adv. SOMNATH BANERJEE

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.PALASH SEN AND ANOTHER Advocate - KUSHAL ROY

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    Final OrderView PDF

    The Howrah Sessions Court granted anticipatory bail to accused Palash Sen and Priyanka Banerjee in a theft case, finding the FIR was filed with significant delay (over a month after the alleged incident) and noting that the complainant had previously filed an FIR against them, suggesting possible counter-allegations. The court imposed stringent conditions including a Rs. 5,000 bond with sureties, availability for police interrogation, and a prohibition on witness tampering, holding that these safeguards adequately protect the investigation without requiring custodial detention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District Judge

  4. 02-Mar-2026

    General OrdersView PDF

  5. 02-Mar-2026

    Hearing of Bail Petition/Petition

    District Judge

  6. 19-Feb-2026

    General OrdersView PDF

  7. 19-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 19-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 384/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Howrah Sessions Court granted anticipatory bail to accused Palash Sen and Priyanka Banerjee in a theft case, finding the FIR was filed with significant delay (over a month after the alleged incident) and noting that the complainant had previously filed an FIR against them, suggesting possible counter-allegations. The court imposed stringent conditions including a Rs. 5,000 bond with sureties, availability for police interrogation, and a prohibition on witness tampering, holding that these safeguards adequately protect the investigation without requiring custodial detention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case