Nurul Hasan v. The State Of West Bengal And ANR
17.06.2025 Serial no. 65 [G.S.D] CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI
CRM (DB) 730 of 2024 In re : An application under Section 483(3) of the BNSS, 2023. -AndIn the matter of : Nurul Hasan ... Petitioner(s) Mr. Satyam Sarkar ... for the petitioner(s) Mr. Arijit Ghosh Ms. Angana Rakshit ... for the o.p. no. 2 Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, ld. APP Mr. Sourav Ganguly ... for the State The present application was preferred for cancellation of bail dated 29.10.2024 which was granted by the learned Vacation Judge, Jalpaiguri in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1973 of 2024.
Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that there was complete non-application of mind of the learned Sessions Judge while granting bail and the same was passed in such a mechanical manner that interference of this Court is called for.
Learned advocate for the private opposite party submits that prior to the present opposite party no.2 being
granted bail, the principal accused was granted anticipatory bail.
Learned advocate for the State has produced the Case Diary and refers to the statement of the victim/injured. I find that there is specific reference being made to Lihaj Hossain for inflicting injuries upon the injured/victim. In view of the accused Abdul Sattar being on a better parity, the learned Sessions Court granted bail to the accused/o.p. no.2 who has already suffered custody. Having considered the reasons so assigned by the learned Judge, I am of the opinion that there were reasons in the order which may not be to the satisfaction of the defacto-complainant but the same cannot be said to be a non-speaking order.
Further, the said order was passed on 29.10.2024 and more than eight months have passed since then, further there are no accusation that the accused/opposite party no.2 has misused the liberty after he was released on bail. Having considered the overall circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the order dated 29.10.2024 so passed by the learned Vacation Judge, Jalpaiguri. Accordingly, CRM(DB) 730 of 2024 is Rejected. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon'ble High Court, Calcutta.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)