Calcutta High CourtCRM(M)/550/2026dismissed

Md Tanvir @ Baccha Tanvir @ Tanvir Ahmed v. State Of West Bengal

2026-04-16Hon'Ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh2 pages

16.04.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Item No.31 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc.

Rejected C.R.M. (M) 550 of 2026 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, filed in connection with Narkeldanga Police Station Case No. 162 of 2025 dated 06.04.2025 under Sections 109(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

And In Re : Md Tanvir @ Baccha Tanvir @ Tanvir Ahmed ... Petitioner.

Mr. Sourov Mondal, Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury, Mr. Arijit Bhuiya, Mr. Rony Mondal, Mr. Debarghyo Sil ... For the Petitioner.

Ms. Sukanya Bhattacharya, Mr. Tirthankar Dhali ... For the State.

Mr. Sayantan Adhya, Mr. Md. Nadeem, Mr. Mir Md Minhat, Mr. Parvej Alam, Mr. Rejwan Ali ... For the de facto complainant.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 16.11.2025; chargesheet has already been submitted. As such, petitioner prays for bail. Additionally, it has been submitted that the injured was first taken to N.R.S. Hospital and subsequently he was admitted to Marwari Relief Society.

Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and produces the case diary which reflects that the petitioner was absconding for a considerable period of time and the seizure list reflects that

Chopper was recovered pursuant to the leading statement of the present petitioner. The injuries are related also to sharp cut injury as is reflected from the injury report. Further, it reflects that about 10 criminal cases pending against the present petitioner.

Having considered the previous antecedents of the present petitioner, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

Petitioner would renew his prayer for bail after the stage of consideration of charges is over.

Report submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record.

The application for bail, being CRM (M) 550 of 2026, is, thus, dismissed.

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.)