Gautam Pandey v. The State Of West Bengal And ANR

20.

10.01.2025 Court No.29 (Pritam) (Rejected)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CRM (DB) 3621 of 2024 In Re: - An application of bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 / Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

And In the matter of: - Gautam Pandey.

.....petitioner.

Ms. Minoti Gomes, Mr. Soumyajit Das Mahapatra, Ms. Shanta Sarkar ...for the petitioner.

Mr. Saibal Bapuli, Ld. APP., Mr. Amanul Islam ....for the State.

Dictated by Apurba Sinha Ray, J.

1. Report filed by the State be kept with the records.

2. We find from the report that the prosecution intends to examine 8 (eight) witnesses, out of whom 2 (two) witnesses have already been examined. The report says that the trial should conclude within six months.

3. We see that the petitioner in custody for a considerable period of time. However, we also have to note that the victim lady is differently-abled. The allegation is under Sections 376(2)(l)/511 of IPC. The maximum punishment prescribed is life-term. The victim lady, in her deposition, squarely implicates this petitioner.

4. In view of the aforesaid, we are not inclined to allow the petitioner's prayer for bail, at this stage.

5. The prayer for bail is, thus, rejected.

6. However, noting the period of detention of the petitioner, we request the learned trial court to expedite the trial and conclude the same within the time-period indicated by the State in its report filed before us.

7. Parties are requested to communicate this order to learned trial court.

(Arijit Banerjee, J.) (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)