Calcutta High CourtCRM (DB)/619/2025rejected

Sanjoy Mukhi @ Sono v. The State Of West Bengal

2025-03-07Hon'Ble Justice Arijit Banerjee,Hon'Ble Justice Prasenjit Biswas2 pages

10.

07.03.2025 Court No.29 (Tanmoy) Rejected

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CRM (DB) 619 of 2025 In Re: - An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 / Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 arising out of Jhargram P.S. Case No.86/2021 dated 06.5.2021.

And In the matter of: - SANJOY MUKHI @ SONO ...petitioner.

Mr. Amit Ranjan Pati Ms. Swastika Chowdhury ...for the petitioner.

Mr. Soumik Ganguly Ms. Ankita Paul ...for the State.

Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J.

1. The petitioner renews his prayer for bail which was rejected on merits earlier twice on June 21, 2023, in CRM (DB) 2286 of 2023 and on January 9, 2024, in CRM (DB) 37 of 2024.

2. There being no significant change of circumstance, we see no reason to re-consider the petitioner's prayer for bail on merits. However, the petitioner says that he is in custody for about three and half years. We see that 32 out of 42 charge-sheet named witnesses have already been examined. Hence we cannot say that there is stagnancy in the trial or lack of progress. Some cases do require examination of several witnesses.

3. We have also seen the material in the case diary.

4. In view of prima facie overwhelming incriminating evidence against the petitioner and seeing that the offence, if proved, may attract punishment of mandatory life imprisonment, we are not

inclined to entertain the petitioner's prayer for bail, at this stage. The prayer for bail is rejected.

5. The application being CRM (DB) 619 of 2025 is accordingly dismissed.

6. However, considering the prolonged detention of the petitioner in custody, we direct the learned Trial Court to do everything possible to expedite the trial and conclude the same on an early date without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties and if necessary, by fixing frequent schedules of 2/3 dates each for examination of witnesses.

7. Parties to communicate this order to the learned Trial Court. (Prasenjit Biswas, J.) (Arijit Banerjee, J.)