Calcutta High CourtCRM(M)/959/2026allowed

Subhadip Roy v. State Of West Bengal

2026-06-11Hon'Ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh3 pages

11.06.2026 Court No.35.

D/L. 14.

Kausik (Allowed) CRM (M) 959 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 Kotulpur Police Station Case No. 388 of 2025 dated 29.11.2025 under Sections 103(1)/61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. And In the matter of : Subhadip Roy ......Petitioner.

Mrs. Pampa Dey (Dhabal) ......for the Petitioner.

Mr. Ramashish Mukherjee Mr. Utsav Dutta ......for the State.

Petitioner was arrested on 29.11.2025 and since then he is in custody. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner along with others, were implicated as an accused in the instant case. However, two of the accused persons namely, Barun Bag and Palash Roy may grant bail. To that effect, attention of the Court has been drawn to the relevant part of the order sheets. It has been contended that the petitioner being similarly placed, be released on bail. Learned advocate for the State has drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of the father of the deceased wherefrom it reflects that the witness referred to 4 persons who were involved in the alleged commission of offence.

Primarily, it reflects that all the 4 accused persons are similarly situated. Consequently, as two of the accused persons have been granted bail, I am inclined to release the present petitioner on bail.

As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. Accordingly, Petitioner, namely, Subhadip 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, Bishnupur.

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 Bankura without the prior permission of the Learned Trial Court. The petitioner shall meet with the Investigating Officer of the case once in a fortnight till the charges are framed by the learned Trial Court. It would be the discretion of the learned Trial Court after the stage of the framing of charge whether to retain such condition or waive the condition. With the aforesaid observations CRM (M) 959 of 2026 is allowed.

Memorandum of evidence submitted by the learned advocate for the State 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.)