Sukanta Mondal v. State Of West Bengal

17.05.2022 Serial no.60 Aloke Ct. No. 29 CRM (DB) 936 of 2022 In re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Dholahat P.S. Case No. 56 dated 01.03.2019 under Sections 363/365 of the Indian Penal Code and adding Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

-AndIn the matter of : Sukanta Mondal ... ...Petitioner Mr. Ayan Basu, Advocate Mr. Sandip Kr. Mondal, Advocate Mr. Sumit Rough, Advocate ... ... For the Petitioner Mr. Binay Panda, Advocate Ms. Puspita Saha, Advocate ... ... For the State Report as called for by the order dated April 20, 2022 be taken on record.

It appears from the report that the defence Advocate was not appointed on May 12, 2022 preventing the recording of the evidence of the prosecution.

Apparently, the petitioner is in custody since March 4, 2019.

In the facts of the present case, the prosecution cannot be said to be indolent in proceeding with the trial. The defence also contributed to the delay.

In such circumstances, we are unable to grant bail to the petitioner on the ground of delay in the trial. CRM (DB) 936 of 2022 is rejected.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)