Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/2205/2026 of ALOK KUMAR BHUSAN Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 23 September 2026
Court No.35. D/L. 889. Kausik (Allowed) CRM (M) 2205 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 Kalyani Police Station Case No. 175 of 2025 dated 28th February,
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.
23.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L. 889. Kausik (Allowed)
CRM (M) 2205 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 Kalyani Police Station Case No. 175 of 2025 dated 28th February, 2025 under Sections 143(2)/143(4)/61 (2)(a) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 80/81 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
And In the matter of : Dr. Alok Kumar Bhusan
……Petitioner.
Mr. Shibaji Kr. Das
Mr. Dipendu Sarkar
Ms. Deblina De
Ms. Moitreyi Das
……for the Petitioner.
Mr. Krishnendu Bhattacharya, Ld. APP
Ms. Priti Kar Bagchi
……for the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody for 133 days. It was the child’s mother who offered the present petitioner who is a medical practitioner to settle the new born child in a government home. Consequent to which the mother left the child with the doctor. Subsequently, petitioner had to face harassment, he was foisted with a criminal case and is in custody for 4 and a half months. Charge sheet has already been submitted and there are no other materials available against the petitioner to call for further detention.
State has opposed the prayer for bail, produced the case diary.
I have taken into account the statement of the mother of the child as well as the statement of one witness. Although the mother had left the child but one of the witness has stated that a sum of Rs. 2,10,000/- (Two Lakhs and Ten Thousand only) was handed over to the present petitioner. Records did not reflect that any money trail has been cross-checked by the investigating agency.
Be that as it may, a case has been made out but the issue is whether custodial trial is called for in the present case.
In view of the fact that the prosecution has relied upon 10 witnesses in order to prove its case, I am of the opinion that further custodial detention of the petitioner may not be warranted in the facts of the case.
As such, prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. As such, petitioner, namely Dr. Alok Kumar Bhusan be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each, one of whom must be local to the satisfaction of Learned ACJM, Kalyani, Nadia.
If on bail, the petitioner shall be physically present on each and every date fixed before the learned Trial Court and shall not leave the jurisdiction of District of Nadia without the prior permission of the learned Trial Court.
Additionally, petitioner will furnish the address where he would be residing after being released on bail and meet with the Officer-in-Charge of the local police station once in every fortnight till the trial is completed before the jurisdictional Court.
Accordingly, CRM (M) 2205 of 2026 is allowed.
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.)