Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/2369/2026 of JAMAT ALI SK @ JAMAT SK Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 9 October 2026
DL 11 Court No. 550 ALLOWED Asraf, A.R.(Ct.) In the High Court at Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. CRM (M) 2369 of 2026 In Re : An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
09.10.2026
Sl. No. DL 11
Court No. 550
ALLOWED
Asraf, A.R.(Ct.)
In the High Court at Calcutta
Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction
Case No.
CRM (M) 2369 of 2026
In Re : An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
filed
in connection with
Nakasipara Police Station case no.317 of 2024 dated 04.04.2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 326, 307, 302
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
-AND-
In the matter of :
JAMAT ALI SK @ JAMAT SK
……Petitioner
For the Petitioner :
Ms. Karabi Roy
…Advocate
For the State :
Mr. Krishnendu Bhattacharya, APP
Ms. Priti Kar Bagchi
…Advocates
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. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for 116 days. She submits that other accused persons who are standing on the same footing are granted bail by this Court. No specific overt act has been attributed against the present petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the present petitioner absconded for about two years and warrant of proclamation and attachment was also issued against him. Subsequently, the present petitioner surrendered before the Court. There are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner and as such, the prayer for bail should be rejected.
3. I have gone through the materials on record. It appears that the present petitioner is standing on the same footing with the other FIR named accused persons who have already been granted bail by this Court.
4. In view of the above, I am of the opinion that the petitioner be released on bail on certain conditions.
5. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed.
6. As such, the petitioner shall furnish bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) each, one of whom must be local to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadia subject to condition that the petitioner shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever and also on further condition that the petitioner shall be physically present on each and every date before the learned Trial Court in seisin of the case and shall not leave the district of Nadia without prior permission of the concerned Trial Court.
7. In the event, the petitioner fails to comply with any of the conditions as mentioned hereinabove without justifiable cause, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court.
8. With the above observations, the instant application for bail is disposed of.
9. Case diary be returned to the learned advocate appearing for the State.
10. All parties shall act on the basis of server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
11. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all necessary formalities.
( Apurba Sinha Ray, J. )