Amrita Singh Bhujel@Amrita Bhujel And ANR v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

18.06.2025 Item no. 44.

Court No.2.

Rakib In the High Court at Calcutta Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction CRM (M) 113 of 2025 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Bagdogra Police Station case no. 449 of 2023 dated 12.09.2023 under Sections 363/266A/376/506 of the Indian Penal Code read with 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 3/4/5/6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.

And In the matter of : Amrita Singh Bhujel @ Amrita Bhujel & Anr. ......Petitioner.

Mr. Arunava Paul.

......for the Petitioners.

Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, ld APP, Mr. Kallol Nag.

......for the State.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are in custody for one year nine months and there has been no progress in the case. Additionally, the petitioners are ladies having children who are unable to serve their families because of their prolonged detention, as such, on any condition the learned advocate for the petitioners prayed for bail.

Learned advocate appearing for the State has produced the Case Diary as also the statement of the victim under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Having regard to the nature of the offences, the complicity of the present petitioners and the subsequent

change of circumstances that date has been fixed for consideration of charges, I am of the view that at this stage it would not be fit and proper to enlarge the present petitioners on bail.

Learned trial Court would after consideration of charges fix a schedule of three dates in a month for the purpose of the present case.

The Assistant Commissioner of Police in-charge of Bagdogra Police Station will ensure that the witnesses so cited and/or for whom summons has been issued for appearance are present before the trial Court on the date so fixed. All efforts be exhausted for progressing with the trial so that at least 15 witnesses are examined by 31st of May, 2026. In case there is a delay and/or the specific target is not achieved by the prosecution, petitioners would be at liberty to renew the prayer for bail.

Accordingly, CRM (M) 113 of 2025 is dismissed. The Officer-in-Charge, Bagdogra Police Station and the Investigating Officer of the case is physically present, their further appearance before this Court be dispensed with. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)