Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/2396/2026 of XXXX Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 23 September 2026
no. 35 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court) CRM (M) 2396 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 Murari PS Case No. 97 of 2026 dated 04.04.2026 u/s 137(2)/108 of the BNS, Section 6(1)
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 Serial no. 35 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court)
CRM (M) 2396 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 Murari PS Case No. 97 of 2026 dated 04.04.2026 u/s 137(2)/108 of the BNS, Section 6(1) o the POCSO Act and Section 9/10 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act.
-And-
In the matter of : XXX
… Petitioner(s)
Mr. Tanmay Chowdhury Ms. Ritoprita Ghosh Ms. Sulagna Sarkar
… for the Petitioner(s) Mr. Ranojoy Chatterjee Mr. Kuntal Ray
… for the State-respondent(s) Mr. Angshuman Chakraborty Mr. S. S. Saha
… for the defacto-complainant
Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 5.04.2026; charge-sheet has already been submitted and other accused persons have been granted bail. The petitioner had a marital tie with the deceased who consumed poison and terminated her life. Learned advocate for the defacto-complainant opposes the prayer for bail and submits that within a close proximity of time after the marriage, the victim terminated her life.
State also opposes the prayer for bail and draws the attention of the court to the postmortem report as well as the statement of the neighbours of the matrimonial home. I have taken into account the overall materials appearing against the present petitioner and is of the opinion that so far as the local witnesses are concerned, the complicity of the present petitioner do not vary with the circumstances under which the other accused persons have been implicated in the present case. Considering the situation and the parity, I am of the opinion that the petitioner may be granted the benefit of bail. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Allowed. Accordingly, the petitioner viz, XXX shall be released on bail upon 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 the Learned Judge, Special Court (POCSO Act), Rampurhat, Birbhum. If on bail, the petitioner shall also make himself physically available on each and every date so fixed by the learned Special court/trial court and shall not leave the district of Birbhum without prior permission of the learned Special court/trial court.
Accordingly, CRM (M) 2396 of 2026 is allowed. Pending application(s), if any, is also disposed of. Memo of evidence submitted be kept with the record. 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.)