Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/1724/2026 of RAJU KUMAR MALI @ AMAN @ RAJ KUMAR MALI @ DEEPAK KUMAR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 6 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.M/L.69 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected C.R.M. (M) 1724 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
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.
06.10.2026
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.M/L.69
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected C.R.M. (M) 1724 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 filed in connection with Burdwan Police Station Case No. 447 of 2020 dated 17.07.2020 under Sections 395/397/326/307 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
And
In Re : Raju Kumar Mali @ Aman @ Raj Kumar Mali @ Deepak Kumar ... Petitioner.
Mr. Satadru Lahiri, Mr. Safdar Azam, Mr. Deepankar Thakur
... For the Petitioner.
Mr. Amarta Ghose, Ms. Swagata Das
... For the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody for 5 years 3 months and only 20 witnesses, till date, have been examined. Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and draws the attention of the Court in respect of the order passed on 14.08.2026 in CRM(M) 576 of 2026 wherein the prayer for bail of another accused in the same case was rejected. There is specific direction already passed wherein it is stated that last opportunity is granted to the State to complete seven witnesses which the prosecution intends to examine in support of its case by 31st December, 2026. The same principle will apply to the present petitioner also.
2 Considering the gravity of the offence, at this stage, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Petitioner will renew his prayer for bail after 31.12.2026. The application for bail, being CRM (M) 1724 of 2026, is, thus, dismissed. All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly 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.)