Calcutta High CourtCRM(M)/1610/2025rejected

Akshay Lal Gond And ANR. v. State Of West Bengal

2025-11-19Hon'Ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh2 pages

19.11.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Item No.51 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc.

Rejected C.R.M. (M) 1610 of 2025 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, filed in connection with Naihati Police Station Case No. 19 of 2025 dated 31.01.2025 under Sections 103(1)/61(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Sections 25/35 of the Arms Act, 1959.

And In Re : Akshay Lal Gond and another ... Petitioners.

Mr. Rajdeep Mazumder, Sr. Adv., Ms. Arushi Rathore, Mr. Soumya Raha ... For the Petitioners.

Mr. Antarikhya Basu, Ms. Eshita Dutta ... For the State.

Mr. Mazumder, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 is in custody for nine months and the petitioner no.2 is in custody for seven months. It has been further contended on behalf of the petitioners that although the petitioners were carrying firearms, but death, as has been reflected in course of investigation, was by way of inflicting injuries by brickbats. Learned senior advocate for the petitioners further submits that since 22 witnesses are to be examined in the present case, there is no possibility of concluding the trial in near future and as such, the petitioners may be released on bail on any stringent conditions.

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

present petitioners fired at the deceased, but the target was missed. Subsequently when the victim ran for saving his life, he was chased by the accused persons including the present petitioners. The wife of the deceased was accompanying him and she has seen the incident. The charge-sheet has already been submitted and charges are framed.

Having considered the stage of the case particularly when the evidence is about to commence, I am not inclined to release the petitioners on bail at this stage. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioners is rejected. Petitioners would be at liberty to pray for bail after the evidence of the eyewitnesses is over.

The application for bail, being CRM (M) 1610 of 2025, 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.)