Tanmay Das @ Gadai @ Raju v. State Of West Bengal

02.04.2025 Ct.No.34 b.das Rejected C.R.M. (DB) 488 of 2025 In Re : An application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 filed in connection with Ausgram Police Station Case No.

of dated 07.01.2024 under Sections 395/397/412 of the Indian Penal Code.

And In Re : Tanmay Das @ Gadai @ Raju ... Petitioner. Mr. Satadru Lahiri Mr. Safdar Azam Mr. S. W. Faruque Mr. J. Talukder ... for the petitioner.

Mr. Madhusudan Sur Mr. Amanul Islam ... for the State.

The petitioner is in custody for more than 400 days. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been implicated on the basis of statement of a co accused and recovery of weapons made from his residence has no nexus with the alleged offence. No gold ornament has been recovered from his custody. He has been identified in TI parade on 2nd March, 2024 long after his arrest. Evidence is yet to be commenced.

Learned counsel for the State produces the case diary and opposes the prayer.

Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has criminal antecedents. Co accused similarly circumstanced as the petitioner has been refused bail. The petitioner has been identified in TI parade and offending weapons have been recovered from his residence.

I have gone through the material on record. The petitioner has been identified in TI parade on 2nd March, 2024 though he was in custody since 11th February, 2024. An earlier prayer made by the petitioner was turned down by this Court by an order dated 25th November, 2024 in CRM (DB) 2804 of 2024 upon holding that prima facie involvement of the petitioner transpired during investigation. This Court directed the learned trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude the same at an early date. There being no change of circumstances to reconsider the prayer of the petitioner at this stage, the prayer for bail is rejected. However, the learned trial Court is directed to comply with the direction of this Court and take the proceeding to its logical conclusion as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, in accordance with law.

The application for bail, being CRM (DB) 488 of 2025, is, thus, disposed of.

Case Diary be returned.

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

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)