Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/2017/2026 of ASHOK PASWAN Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 30 September 2026
30.09.2026 Rohit, A.R.(Ct.) ct.no.35 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M (M) 2017 of 2026 Ashok Paswan Vs The State of West Bengal In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/ Section 483 of the
D/L 35
30.09.2026
Rohit, A.R.(Ct.)
ct.no.35
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
C.R.M (M) 2017 of 2026
Ashok Paswan
Vs
The State of West Bengal
In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/ Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Pandeveswar Police Station Case No. 138 dated 15.09.2024 under Sections 103(1)/3(5)
of the BNS, 2023
And
In the matter of : Ashok Paswan
……Petitioner.
Mr. Amajit De
Ms. Poulami Bose
Mr. Gouranga Dey
…for the Petitioner
Dr. Pradip Banerjee, A.P.P
Ms. Nabanita Chatterjee
…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. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody for more than one year ten months and only five witnesses have been examined out of sixteen witnesses cited by the prosecution. All the vulnerable witnesses have been completed. As such, petitioner be released on bail as another accused has been granted bail.
2. Learned Advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and draws the attention of the Court to the statement of son of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C as well as the post-mortem report.
3. Having considered the complicity of the present petitioner which is distinguishable from the other accused, a last opportunity is granted to the state. State would complete the evidence of all the witnesses within a period of six months from the next date fixed.
4. Petitioner would renew his prayer for bail after the aforesaid time period is over. At this stage, C.R.M. (M) 2017 of 2026 is dismissed.
5. Memo of evidence submitted be kept with the record.
6. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the Official website of this Court.
7. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)