Calcutta High CourtCRM(M)/821/2026allowed

Souvik Roy v. State Of West Bengal

2026-06-25Hon'Ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh2 pages

25.06.2026 Court No.35.

D/L. 38.

Kausik (Allowed) CRM (M) 821 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Noapara Police Station Case No. 223 of 2025 dated 16.10.2025 under Sections 103(1)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

And In the matter of : Souvik Roy ......Petitioner.

Mr. Sekhar Kr. Basu, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Suchismita Dutta Ms. Pranidhi Singh Mr. Narattam Acharya ......for the Petitioner.

Mr. Krishnendu Bhattacharya, APP Mr. Bankim Pal ......for the State.

Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, petitioner is in custody for 9 months and although charge sheet has been submitted but till date charges have not been framed.

Mr. Bhattacharya, learned APP appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and draws the attention of the Court to the post-mortem report as well as the statement of the eye witnesses under Section 183 of the BNSS.

I have taken into account the subject matter of dispute and the police report also do not reflect that the petitioner has criminal antecedents, although the temperament of the present

petitioner has been questioned by several witnesses. But the incident complained of prima facie reflects sudden provocation. Having regard to the period of detention of the present petitioner and the time which will be consumed to take the trial to its logical conclusion, I am of the opinion that the petitioner may be released on bail.

Accordingly prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. Accordingly, Petitioner, namely, Souvik Roy shall furnish bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each, one of whom must be local to the satisfaction of Learned ACJM, Barrackpore.

If on bail, the petitioner shall be physically present on each and every date fixed before the learned Trial Court and shall not leave the jurisdiction of District of 24 Parganas North without the prior permission of the learned Trial Court. Thus, CRM (M) 821 of 2026 is allowed.

Memo of Evidence submitted be kept with the record. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order 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.)