Calcutta High CourtCRM(M)/132/2026dismissed

Md Alomgir Sk And ANR. v. State Of West Bengal

2026-02-04Hon'Ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh2 pages

04.02.2026 Court No.35.

D/L. 39.

Kausik (Rejected) CRM (M) 132 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Samsherganj Police Station Case No. 204 of 2025 dated 12.04.2025 under Sections 191(2)/191(3)/190/324(4)/326(f)/326(g)/118(1)/117(2)/132/ 109/121(1)/121(2)/351(2)/303 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under section 3/4 of PDPP Act and under section 9 of Maintenance of Public Order (MPO) Act and under section 8B of National Highways (NH) Act.

And In the matter of : Md. Alomgir Sk. & Anr.

......Petitioners.

Mr. Satadru Lahiri Ms. Benajir Hasna Mr. Aliul Islam Mr. Sadid Haider ......for the Petitioners.

Ms. Subhasree Patel Mr. Shashanka Shekhar Saha ......for the State.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner no. 1 is in custody for 10 months and petitioner no. 2 is in custody for 7 months. Learned advocate submits that out of the 64 witnesses cited by the prosecution, only 12 witnesses till date has been examined and there is no possibility of the trial concluding very soon, further the complicity of the petitioner has not surfaced in course of the investigation or in course of the trial. As such, they may be released on bail.

Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that 13 witnesses till date has been examined and the prosecution intends to examine 12 more witnesses. A schedule has been placed before this Court. Be that as it may, having considered the report which has been submitted and the fact that the incident complained of at the relevant point of time jeopardized the normal circumstances/life of the district and the area concerned, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioners in CRM (M) 132 of 2026 is rejected.

Petitioner would renew his prayer for bail at the appropriate stage after the reasonable period is over. Report submitted by the State be kept with the record.

All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)