Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/2266/2026 of XXXXX Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 7 October 2026
Court No.35. M/L.89. Rakib (Rejected) CRM (M) 2266 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kaliganj Police Station case no. 755 of 2024 dated 02.09.2024
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.
07.10.2026 Court No.35. M/L.89. Rakib (Rejected)
CRM (M) 2266 of 2026
In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kaliganj Police Station case no. 755 of 2024 dated 02.09.2024 under Sections 65(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
And In the matter of : XXX
……Petitioner. Mr. Sumanta Chakraborty Ms. Dhimoyee Kundu Ms. Tanisha Parua
.....for the Petitioner. Mr. Rajendra Banerjee Ms. Hasi Saha Mr. Chandra Gupta Kamal
……for the State. Ms. Suchismita Dutta
.......for De-facto complainant.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since September, 2024 and there is no possibility of the trial being concluded in near future, as such, petitioner be released on bail. Further there has been no progress in the case according to the petitioner. Learned advocate appearing for the de-facto complainant submits that a minor of three years eight months was subjected to sexual abused. Learned advocate appearing for the State has submitted photostat copy of the order dated 10.09.2026 of the learned Special Court which reflects that out of 18 witnesses 15 witnesses have already been examined.
2 Having considered the final stage of the case, six months more time is granted to the prosecution to complete the deposition of all the witnesses concerned. As such, prayer for bail of the petitioner as this stage is rejected. Accordingly, CRM (M) 2266 of 2026 is dismissed. Report in respect of service being effected upon the private opposite party and memo of evidence submitted by the State be kept with the record. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)