Calcutta High CourtCRM(M)/1365/2026dismissed

Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjoy Yadav v. State Of West Bengal

2026-06-16Hon'Ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh2 pages

16.06.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Item No.42 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc.

Rejected C.R.M. (M) 1365 of 2026 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, filed in connection with Rahara Police Station Case No. 187 of 2025 dated 05.07.2025 under Sections 109/115(2)/117(2)/ 118(2)/3(5)/329(4)/351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 along with addition Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (G.R. Case No. 4399 of 2025). And In Re :

Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjoy Yadav ... Petitioner.

Mr. Soumyajit Das Mahapatra, Mr. Koustav Bagchi, Mr. Debayan Ghosh, Ms. Madhurai Sinha, Ms. Priti Kar Bagchi ... For the Petitioner.

Mr. Gouranga Kumar Das, APP, Mr. Suman Chakraborty ... For the State.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for 11 months, charge-sheet has already been submitted and the prosecution has relied upon 28 witnesses in order to prove its case. There is no possibility of the trial being concluded in near future. Additionally, it has been submitted that the genesis of the dispute is with respect to property and the same is a family dispute which was blown out of proportion. It has also been contended that two of the accused persons viz. Ajoy Pasi and Hira Yadav are already on bail. As such, the petitioner may be released on bail.

Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the vital

blow was inflicted by the present petitioner. It has also been submitted on behalf of the State that date has been fixed for consideration of charges.

As such, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail as some of the accused persons are absconding. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

Petitioner will renew his prayer for bail after the stage of consideration of charges is over.

Report submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record.

The application for bail, being CRM (M) 1365 of 2026, is, thus, dismissed.

All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly 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.)