Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/1906/2026 of BABULAL CHWODHURY @ BABLU @ BABLU CHOWDHURY Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 28 September 2026
Court No.35. D/L. 27. Kausik (Rejected) CRM (M) 1906 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Gangarampur Police Station Case No. 162 of 2026 dated 25.03.2026
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.
28.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L. 27. Kausik (Rejected)
CRM (M) 1906 of 2026
In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Gangarampur Police Station Case No. 162 of 2026 dated 25.03.2026 under Sections 109(1)/118(2)/126(2)/351(2)/61(2) of the BNS, 2023 read with Sections 25(1-A)/25(1-D)(A)/27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
And In the matter of : Babulal Chowdhury @ Bablu @ Bablu Chowdhury
……Petitioner.
Mr. Arindam Jana
Mr. D.K. Maity
Mr. Rahul Surtani
……for the Petitioner.
Mr. Brajesh Jha
Mr. Shankar Mukherjee
….for the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody for 6 months. Charge sheet has been submitted and because of political affiliation he has been foisted with the criminal case.
Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits so far as the evidence is concerned, it is the petitioner who had fired at the injured.
Learned advocate appearing for the State additionally submits that there are 7 criminal antecedents of the present
2 petitioner which include offences under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code as also 3 cases are under the Arms Act.
Having considered the antecedent of the petitioner and his complicity in the present case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, CRM (M) 1906 of 2026 is dismissed.
Memo of Evidence submitted 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.)