Calcutta High CourtCRM(M)/1728/2025dismissed

Adhir Ghosh And ANR. v. State Of West Bengal

2025-11-21Hon'Ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh2 pages

21.11.2025 Court No.35.

D/L. 61.

Kausik (Rejected) CRM (M) 1728 of 2025 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Suti Police Station Case No. 902 of 2024 dated 04.12.2024 under section 126(2)/118(2)/109/3(5) of BNS, 2023 adding section 103(1) of BNS, 2023;

And In the matter of : Adhir Ghosh & Anr.

......Petitioners.

Mr. Sandip Chakraborty Mr. Kaustav Das ......for the Petitioners.

Mr. Kallol Mondal, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Krishan Ray Mr. Souvik Das Mr. Anamitra Banerjee Mr. Sreyash Kr. Singh ....for the defacto complainant.

Mr. Sanjoy Banerjee Ms. Debjani Sahu ......for the State.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in custody for 10 months and although petitioner no. 1 was named in the FIR but the petitioner no. 2 was not named in the FIR and his name has been subsequently inserted by way of embellishment in course of investigation. It has also been submitted that the petitioner no. 1 also sustained grievous injury but the police authorities after repeated persuasion and thereafter direction of the Court only registered the case.

State has submitted the case diary and pointed out that 5 accused persons presently are absconding and because of such absconsion there was some delay in progress of the case. Presently the case has been split up. One charge sheet witness is being examined.

Having considered that the prosecution has relied upon 20 witnesses in the charge sheet in order to prove its case, I direct the learned Trial Court to conclude at least the evidence of 10 witnesses by 15.05.2026.

At this stage, the prayer for bail of the petitioners in CRM (M) 1728 of 2025 is dismissed.

Petitioners would renew their prayer for bail after the said period is over. No unnecessary adjournment be granted to either of the parties and the trial of the case would continue in spite of any resolution of the local bar.

Learned advocate for the State is directed to inform his counter-part so that the order is placed before the learned Trial Court.

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.)