Rana Baidya @ Rana v. State Of West Bengal

06.11.2025 SL No. 3 Court No.35 Rohan (Allowed)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M.(DB) 3910 of 2024 In Re: An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as amended under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kasba Police Station/DD Case No. 76 of 2017 dated 07.02.2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 148/302/149/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 3/5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 read with Sections 25(1)(a)/25(1B)(a)/27 of the Arms Act, 1959. -AndIn the matter of: Rana Baidya @ Rana

...Petitioner

Mr. Phiroze Edulji, Sr. Adv., Mr. Avik Ghatak, Sk. Yusuf Munnan, Mr. Sanjay Das, Mr. Akash Ghosh, Ms. Priyanka Bhattacharya.

...for the Petitioner Mr. Kunal Ganguly ...for the State

1. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for more than 8 (eight) years and similarly placed accused persons, who were arrested in connection with the instant case, were granted bail at different stages of the case. Presently, 2 (two) of the absconding accused persons have surrendered before the Trial Court. As such, the trial which commenced and progressed to a stage where 11 (eleven) to 12 (twelve) witnesses out of the 53 (fifty-three) witnesses proposed to be examined by the prosecution would

again commence because of the 2 (two) absconding accused (from the stage of framing of charges).

2. Learned advocate for the State submits that the delay in trial is because of the accused persons, however, from the records, according to the State, it reflects that 7 (seven) accused persons have been released on bail.

3. Having considered the period of detention of the present petitioner and the fact that the learned advocate appearing for the State is unable to appraise this Court as to whether there are any antecedents of the present petitioner and the fact that the petitioner was granted interim bail on an earlier occasion, I am of the view that the bail of the petitioner, namely, Rana Baidya @ Rana be confirmed.

4. Conditions so imposed earlier would continue till the conclusion of the evidences of all the witnesses are over.

5. Accordingly, CRM (DB) 3910 of 2024 is allowed.

6. All parties shall act in terms of the server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court.

7. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)