Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/2040/2026 of KARTICK DASBAIRAGYA @ FUCHA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 7 October 2026
ct 33 C.R.M.(M) No. 2040 of 2026 sl no. 32 cm/S. Das In Re : In Re : An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kirnahar P.S. Case No. 10 of 2026 dated 09.02.2026. Sections 126(2)/103(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
07.10.2026
ct 33
C.R.M.(M) No. 2040 of 2026
sl no. 32
cm/S. Das
In Re : In Re : An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kirnahar P.S. Case No. 10 of 2026 dated 09.02.2026. Sections 126(2)/103(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
And
Rejected
In Re : Kartick DasBairagya @ Fucha.
….. petitioner
Mr. Sujoy Sarkar
…… for the petitioner
Mr. Anamitra Banerjee
Mr. Utsav Dutta
…… for the State
Mr. Manas Kumar Das
Mr. Aritra Kumar Thokdar
… for the De-facto complainant
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 that the victim had expired after two days of the alleged incident. The incident had been accidental in nature where a buffalo had collided with the motor cycle of the petitioner. Incidentally, the buffalo belonged to the deceased victim. There was an instantaneous brawl between the parties and the victim had expired after two days of hospitalization. The victim did not disclose any name of the accused to have been involved in the alleged offence either in the injury report or any other medical documents, no dying declaration had been recorded.
2. The learned advocate representing the State submitted that the incident to have been corroborated through the witnesses in their statements recorded under Section 183
2 of the BNSS. The charge-sheet has been filed on 3rd May, 2026 and the trial is yet to be commenced. It was further submitted that two persons out of the four accused persons are still absconding.
3. Considering the narrative in the complaint, the statements recorded under Section 183 BNSS, the injury report, the medical records of hospitalization and the post-mortem report, the alleged offence being grave and abominable in nature, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.
4. More-over, two of the accused persons are still absconding. The learned trial court is to take necessary steps as per its own discretion to expedite the process of trial.
5. Accordingly, the application being CRM(M) 2040 of 2026 is dismissed.
(Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.)