Hajirul Islam v. State Of West Bengal
25.06.2026 Serial no. 79 [G.S.D] CRM (M) 892 of 2026 In re : An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with Islampur, Uttar Dinajpur Session Case No. 54 of 2024 arising out of Islampur PS Case No. 751 of 2023 dated 10.10.2023 u/s 448/326/307/302/120B of the IPC.
-AndIn the matter of : Hajirul Islam ... Petitioner(s) Mr. Dilip Kumar Maiti Ms. M. Maiti ... for the Petitioner(s) Mr. Debajyoti Deb Mr. Neel Chakraborty ... for the State-respondent(s) Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent of the charges and is in custody for two years eight months. According to the learned advocate, the prosecution, till date, has been able to examine only nine witnesses out of the 15 witnesses cited in the chargesheet. Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is thickly connected with the offence and was hired for committing the offence. Learned advocate also emphasizes that there are other overwhelming materials appearing against the present petitioner.
Having considered the stage of the case, at this point of time, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected.
However, the learned trial court would complete rest of the six witnesses within a period of six months from the next date. No unnecessary adjournment be granted to any of the parties and the trial of the case would continue inspite of any resolution of the local bar.
The petitioner would be at liberty to approach this court after the aforesaid time period is over. Accordingly, CRM (M) 892 of 2026 is dismissed. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon'ble High Court, Calcutta. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)