Rohit Benbanshi @ Rohit Benwanshi @ Rambo v. The State Of West Bengal

24.06.2026 Serial no. 3 [G.S.D] CRM (M) 1372 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 S.T. No. 54 of 2025, arising out of Sessions Case No. 53 of 2025 arising out of Bhadreswar PS Case No. 1 of 2025 dated the 1st day of January, 2025 u/s 103(1) of the BNS, 2023. -AndIn the matter of : Rohit Benbanshi @ Rohit Benwanshi @ Rambo ... Petitioner(s) Mr. Soumyajit Das Mahapatra Mr. Koustav Bagchi Ms. Priti Kar Bagchi Mr. Debayan Ghosh Ms. Madhurai Sinha Ms. Upasana Banerjee Mr. BisalRoy ... for the Petitioner(s) Ms. Surabhi Banerjee ... for the State-respondent(s) Mr. Arunava Ganguly Mr. ArkaprabhoRoy ... for the defacto-complainant Supplementary Affidavit filed by the petitioner be kept with the record.

Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was arrested on 01.01.2025, thereafter, he was granted bail.

However, this court by an order dated 07.11.2025 was pleased to cancel the bail granted on the ground that certain vulnerable witnesses were to be examined. The said vulnerable witnesses, namely, Raja Saroj and Krishna Chowdhury have already been examined.

Learned advocate for the defacto-complainant submits that the present petitioner had clout in the area and he was so influential that the police authorities also did not register any case against him and this is the only case after the murder was committed which has been portrayed in such a fashion that he was booked for the offence. Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that challenging such order of cancellation, the petitioner approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court but subsequently decided to withdraw the said application.

So far as the prosecution is concerned, seven witnesses have already been examined and another 17 witnesses are to be examined.

The police authorities have submitted a report which reflects that there are no criminal antecedents of the present petitioner. There was also no complaint that he indulged any activities to the prejudice of the prosecution during the period when he was granted interim bail. Having considered the fact that the vulnerable witnesses have been examined and the incident arose after a football match and the issue is restricted to music being played, I am of the opinion that further detention of the present petitioner may not be called for in view of the trial will consume some more time.

Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Allowed.

Accordingly, the petitioner viz, Rohit Benbanshi @ Rohit Benwanshi @ Rambo shall be released on bail upon furnishing 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 the learned ACJM, Chandernagore, Hooghly. If on bail, the petitioner shall also make himself physically available on each and every date so fixed by the learned trial court and shall not leave the district of Hooghly without prior permission of the learned trial court. Further, the petitioner shall not enter the jurisdiction of Bhadreswar Police Station till further orders of this court. Accordingly, CRM (M) 1372 of 2026 is allowed. Report submitted by the State be kept with the record.

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.)