Calcutta High CourtCRM(M)/1329/2026dismissed as not pressed

Siddhartha Churiwal v. State Of West Bengal

2026-06-12Hon'Ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh3 pages

12.06.2026 Court No.35.

D/L. 60.

Kausik CRM (M) 1329 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 Maidan Police Station Case No. 41 dated 03.04.2026 under Section 103(2) of the BNS, 2023.

And In the matter of : Sri Siddartha Churiwal ......Petitioner.

Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Jaydeep Biswas Ms. Sreemoyee Roy Choudhury Mr. Abhishek Banerjee Mr. Arkadeb Bhattacharya ......for the Petitioner.

Mr. Aniruddha Bhattacharyya ....for the Victim.

Mr. Kallol Mondal, PP Dr. Pradip Banerjee, APP Mr. Arnab Sau ......for the State.

Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for 70 days and has been falsely implicated in connection with the instant case. It has been also pointed out that the deceased was engaged in the employment of a family business of the present petitioner and out of nothing, has been implicated in the false case as on the date of the incident the petitioner was attending a family funeral at a completely different location.

According to the petitioner there are no witnesses to substantiate the allegation that it is only the dying declaration of the deceased which is the foundation of the case. The chronology of events from the FIR and the dying declaration which is the genesis of the present case do not support the sequence of events pressed upon by the prosecution for registration of the case and continuation of the same. Additionally, it has been submitted that for about 70 days the petitioner is in custody and his further detention is unwarranted.

However, towards the end of the argument, Mr. Ganguly, learned Senior Advocate submits that he has instructions not to proceed with the bail application further on merits. Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned advocate appears for the defacto complainant. Learned Public Prosecutor appears on behalf of the State.

Having considered the gravity of the offence as also the submissions advanced by Mr. Ganguly, learned Senior Advocate, CRM (M) 1329 of 2026 is allowed to be withdrawn, as such the bail application is dismissed as not pressed. Petitioner would be at liberty to approach this Court after the completion of investigation.

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.)