Ramesh Sardar @ Hansa Sardar v. The State Of West Bengal

05.03.2025 Court No.26 S.D.

Rejected CRM (DB) 4381 of 2024 In re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Sonarpur Police Station Case No. 118 of 2020 dated 06.02.2020 under Sections 302/195A/120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1B)(a)/27 of the Arms Act.

-AndIn the matter of: Ramesh Sardar @ Hansa Sardar ... ... Petitioner Mr. Debadipto Banerjee Mr. S. Das ...For the petitioner Mr. Joydip Biswas Ms. Trisha Rakshit ... ...For the State Mr. Nabanil Dey Mr. Apalak Basu Mr. Nazir Ahmed ...For the defacto complainant Report as called for by the order dated February 21, 2025 filed in Court be taken on record.

Petitioner seeks bail on the ground of period of custody.

It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody for 3 years and 7 months. With the 21 prosecution witnesses scheduled to be examined, out of

which only 6 were examined, possibility of the trial ending any time soon in the near future does not exist. Learned advocate appearing for the State submits that there are criminal antecedents so far as the petitioner is concerned. She submits that there are 6 criminal cases, out of which, at least one relates to Arms Act.

Petitioner stands implicated in murder.

Trial is in progress.

It is contended on behalf of the defacto complainant that there are 30 criminal cases against the father of the petitioner.

Given the nature of the materials on record and the involvement of the petitioner in the murder as also the criminal antecedents of the petitioner we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Enlarging the petitioner on bail in the facts and circumstances of the present case may send a wrong signal to the society.

Criminal antecedent of the petitioner demonstrates that there are at least two police cases involving the petitioner threatening witnesses.

In such circumstances, police will ensure protection of the witnesses of the present police case.

At this stage, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner seeks a direction for expeditious disposal of the trial.

Learned Trial Judge is requested to endeavour and dispose of the trial as expeditiously as possible. In doing so keeping the request of the petitioner before us in mind will not allow any adjournment so far as the defence is concerned.

C.R.M. (DB) 4381 of 2024 stands dismissed.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)