Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/2106/2026 of MADAN RABIDAS Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 29 September 2026
no. 510 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court) CRM (M) 2106 of 2026 In re : An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with Baishnabnagar PS case nbo. 566 of 2021 dated 16.10.2021 u/s 363/365/34 of the IPC
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.
29.09.2026 Serial no. 510 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court)
CRM (M) 2106 of 2026
In re : An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with Baishnabnagar PS case nbo. 566 of 2021 dated 16.10.2021 u/s 363/365/34 of the IPC adding section 370 of the IPC and section 6 of the POCSO Act.
-And-
In the matter of : Madan Rabidas
… Petitioner(s)
Mr. Dattatreya Dutta Mr. Dibakar Sardar Mr. Monjit Bhattacharjee
… for the Petitioner(s)
Mr. L. Vishal Kumar Mr. Sanjib Das
… for the State-respondent(s)
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was arrested on 16.01.2023 and since then he is in custody. However, till date, only five witnesses have been examined out of the total 10 witnesses cited by the prosecution, as such, there is no possibility of the trial being concluded very soon. Learned advocate, therefore, prays that the petitioner may be released on bail on any stringent conditions. State opposes the prayer for bail. I have taken into account the evidence of the victim, which specifically implicates the present petitioner in the alleged commission of offence.
Having considered the period which has passed in the meantime, as a last opportunity, State is granted six months’ time from the next date fixed before the learned trial court, to complete rest of the witnesses. In case, the evidence of the prosecution witnesses is not completed within the aforesaid time schedule, the petitioner, on an application for bail, if preferred, be released on bail, on such terms and conditions as the learned trial court would deem fit and proper. At this stage, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected. Accordingly, CRM (M) 2106 of 2026 is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, is also disposed of. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)