Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/2169/2026 of MOHAMMAD AFROZ KHAN @ GULZAR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 14 October 2026
Court No.33. (Pritam) (Rejected) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CRM (M) 2169 of 2026 In Re: An application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in
10.
14.10.2026.
Court
No.33. (Pritam)
(Rejected)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
CRM (M) 2169 of 2026
In Re: An application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kasba Police Station Case No.474/2024 dated 15.11.2024 under Sections 109/3(5)/61(2)/338/111(2)(b)/111(3) of the BNS, 2023
and under Section 25(2)/25(10)(a)/27/35 of the Arms Act.
In the matter of: - Mohammad Afroz Khan @ Gulzar
..…petitioner.
Mr. Swapan Kumar Mallick
Mr. Abhinava Mukherjee
..…for the petitioner.
Mr. Kallol Mondal, Ld. P.P.
Mr. Amarta Ghose
Mr. P. Das
...for the State.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The Learned Advocate representing the petitioner submitted the petitioner to have been arrested on 16.11.2024 being in custody since then. Charge-sheet was initially submitted on 13th of January, 2025 and the supplementary charge-sheet had been submitted ultimately on 30.08.2025 whereby from the statement of co-accuseds, the present petitioner had been falsely implicated and considering the period of detention, prayed for grant of bail. It was further submitted that the co- accused persons have already been granted bail.
2. The Learned Advocate representing the State indicated to a voice message recording communication between the present
2 petitioner and co-accused Gulzar whereby contract money to murder the victim had been received in Bihar and the gang members were asked to execute the plan immediately. It was further submitted that the co-accuseds, granted bail by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court, had not been similarly circumstanced with the present petitioner.
3. It was further submitted that the CDR, SDR and the contemporaneous documents implicated the present petitioner to have been actively involved in the commission of the alleged offence. Considering the contents of the charge-sheet as aforesaid, the call record details and the contemporaneous documents including digital materials and the statements recorded under Section 180 and 183 of the BNSS and that the prayer for bail of the present petitioner to have been rejected by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM(M) 1424 of 2025 vide Order dated December 01, 2025, the prayer for bail is rejected.
4. Accordingly, the application being CRM(M) No. 2169 of 2026 is dismissed.
5. (Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.)