Sekh Akkel Ali @ Akkel Sekh @ Akkel Sk @ Sk Akkel Ali v. State Of West Bengal

11.11.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Item No.17 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc.

C.R.M. (M) 1797 of 2025 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, filed in connection with Monteswar Police Station Case No. 04 of 2025 dated 03.01.2025 under Sections 126(2)/115(2)/ 117(2)/118(2)/109(1)/103(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

And In Re :

Sekh Akkel Ali alias Akkel Sekh alias Akkel Sk. alias Sk. Akkel Ali ... Petitioner.

Mr. Atanu Biswas, Mr. Mrinal Saha, Mr. Sourav Saha ... For the Petitioner.

Mr. Joydeep Biswas, Mr. Karan Bapuli ... For the State.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for about 312 days and although charge-sheet was submitted on 28.03.2025, but till date there has been no progress in the case. Additionally, it has been submitted that although it has been stated before the learned Magistrate by the prosecution in respect of supplementary charge-sheet to be submitted, but hardly there are any materials for the police authorities to submit supplementary charge-sheet. Further, no incriminating materials have been so seized, collected or are appearing to detain the petitioner further.

Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that incident which took place is a heinous offence; a person was

murdered, two persons were injured and two accused persons are still absconding.

Having considered that the case was registered on 03.01.2025, I direct the learned Trial Court to exhaust the process so far as the absconding accused persons are concerned at the earliest. After the processes are exhausted, the learned Magistrate would split up the trial after compliance with the provisions of Section 230 of the BNSS. All steps be taken so that at the earliest, the case may be committed to the court of sessions for necessary progress of the trial.

Having regard to the complicity of the present petitioner, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail at this stage. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

Case diary be returned to the learned advocate appearing for the State.

Report so submitted on behalf of the State be kept with the record.

The application for bail, being CRM (M) 1797 of 2025, is, thus, disposed of.

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.)