Saifuddin Goldar v. The State Of West Bengal

21.01.2026 Court No.35.

D/L.51.

Rakib (rejected) CRM (M) 10 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Eco Park Police Station case no. 195 of 2024 dated 01.09.2024 under Section 103/61(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. And In the matter of : Saifuddin Goldar ......Petitioner.

Ms. Anita Kaunda Ms. Anubrata Dutta ......for the Petitioner.

Mr. Avishek Sinha Ms. Suruchi Saha ......for the State.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody for one year three months and he has been falsely implicated in connection with the instant case. Additionally, it has been submitted that the mastermind in the case has been granted bail, to that learned advocate drew the attention of the Court to the stand taken by the State before the learned Sessions Court while one of the accused was granted bail. Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that witness action has already commenced. Petitioner was arrested thereafter and the earlier orders of this Court reflect that petitioner was identified in the T.I. Parade and was present on the spot wherefrom the factual foundation of hired persons for killing the deceased was corroborated.

Having regard to the previous orders passed by this Court in CRM (M) 1080 of 2025; CRM (DB) 3737 of 2024 and CRM (DB) 1009 of 2025, I am of the view that at this stage it would not be fit and proper to release the petitioner on bail until and unless the evidence of the independent witnesses along with eye-witnesses are concluded.

Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and ensure that atleast two witnesses are examined on each month. Petitioner and the State would corroborate with the learned trial Court.

No unnecessary adjournment be granted to any of the parties and the trial of the case would continue in spite of the resolution of the local bar.

Petitioner would be at liberty to approach this Court after a period of four months from the next date so fixed by the learned trial Court.

At this stage, CRM (M) 10 of 2026 is dismissed. 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.)