Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/1936/2026 of ANSAR AKRAM MOLLA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 28 September 2026
47 Court No.35 Rohan (Rejected) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M.(M) 1936 of 2026 In Re: An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Usthi Police Station Case No. 420 of 2023
28.09.2026
Sl. No. 47
Court No.35
Rohan
(Rejected)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
C.R.M.(M) 1936 of 2026
In Re: An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Usthi Police Station Case No. 420 of 2023 dated 10.09.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 448/364/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
-And-
In the matter of: Ansar Akram Molla
…Petitioner
Mr. Arnab Chatterjee
Mr. Mizanur Rahman
Mr. A. Ghosh
…for the Petitioner
Mr. Pradip Banerjee, APP
Ms. Priyanka Chandra
…for the State
Ms. Mita Das (Ghosh)
Ms. Shreyasi Manna
… for the De-facto Complainant
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 the petitioner is in custody for more than 2 years 6 months and till date only eleven (11) witnesses have been examined out of twenty- three (23) witnesses as cited in the charge-sheet. The genesis of the case was assault by the villagers upon an individual because of his conduct. The petitioner was not initially named in the FIR but was subsequently named in the charge-sheet.
2. Learned advocate appearing for the State submits that only two
(02) witnesses are left to be examined, i.e., the Investigating
Officer and the Constable, whom the prosecution intends to rely upon.
3. Learned advocate appearing for the de-facto complainant opposes the prayer for bail and tries to impress upon the injuries inflicted.
4. Be that as it may, having considered the period of detention as also the final stage which has been claimed by the prosecution as they have scaled down the number of witnesses. I direct that in case the prosecution is unable to complete the two (02) witnesses which they have submitted, would be examined in support of its case by 31st December, 2026, in spite of cooperation extended by the accused persons, learned Trial Court would release the petitioner on bail on such terms and conditions as it deems fit and proper.
5. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, namely, Ansar Akram Molla is rejected at this stage in view of the direction as passed above.
6. Learned Trial Court would adhere to the direction as passed above.
7. With the aforesaid observation, CRM (M) 1936 of 2026 is disposed of.
8. Memo of evidence submitted be kept with the record.
9. All parties shall act in terms of the server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court.
10. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)