Calcutta High CourtCRM(M)/549/2026dismissed

Rupa Bibi v. State Of West Bengal

2026-03-31Hon'Ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh2 pages

31.03.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Item No.74 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc.

Rejected C.R.M. (M) 549 of 2026 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, filed in connection with Bharatpur Police Station Case No. 220 of 2025 dated 15.07.2025 under Sections 103/61(2)/238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

And In Re : Rupa Bibi ... Petitioner.

Mr. Kallol Kumar Basu, Md. Jannat Ul Firdous, Mr. Rajsekhar Hota ... For the Petitioner.

Mr. Suman De, Mr. Kunal Ganguly ... For the State.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 15.07.2025, charges have been framed and three of the prosecution witnesses have already been examined. It has been further submitted that the case is based on circumstantial evidence and the prosecution case do not clinchingly point any finger so far as the present petitioner is concerned. Petitioner has a daughter and her husband having died she has been falsely implicated in connection with the instant case on the accusation of illicit relationship.

Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that within eight months, prosecution has taken steps for proceeding

with the case. There are vulnerable witnesses including child of the deceased who are required to be examined. In view of the stage of the case, I direct that the learned Public Prosecutor conducting the trial would submit a list of vulnerable witnesses to the learned Court. The same should include the child of the deceased and/or the present petitioner.

Learned Trial Court would take steps so that the evidence of the said witnesses is completed within a period of six months from date.

Petitioner would be at liberty to approach this Court after such evidence is over.

At this stage, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

The application for bail, being CRM (M) 549 of 2026, is, thus, disposed of.

All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly 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.)