Tarjan Mondal v. State Of West Bengal

27.02.2025 Item no. 61.

Court No.29.

AB (Rejected) CRM (DB) 148 of 2025 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Thanarpara P.S. Case No.67 of 2024 Dated 16.03.2024 under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code And In the matter of : Tarjan Mondal ......Petitioner.

Md. Sabir Ahmed, Mr. Abdul Aziz Mondal ......for the Petitioner.

Ms. Sreyashee Biswas Mr. Asif Dewan ......for the State.

Dictated by Apurba Sinha Ray, J.

1.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for about 11 months. The other accused persons, who have been named in the statements recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. 2023 and the First Information Report, have been granted bail. The present petitioner has been implicated in this case due to political grudge that has been reflected in the charge sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer. There is no chance of an early conclusion of the trial. Considering the period of detention and the fact that investigation is complete, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail on any condition.

2.

Learned Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail. According to him, there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner. The First Information Report and the statements recorded under Section

180/183 of the B.N.S.S. 2023 show the name of the present petitioner. Moreover, some of the accused persons are still absconding. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, the prosecution may suffer.

3.

We have considered the materials on record and CD. It appears from the statements recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. 2023 that the witnesses have specifically named the present petitioner and other accused persons. The First Information Report as well as the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. 2023 specifically named the petitioner and divulged his complicity. As the other accused persons are still absconding and there are incriminating materials against the petitioner, we are not inclined to entertain his prayer for bail, at this stage. 4.

The prayer for bail is rejected.

5.

CRM (DB) 148 of 2025 is dismissed.

6.

All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.) (Arijit Banerjee, J.)