Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/1847/2026 of MAHARAJ SK. Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 23 September 2026
no. 71 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court) CRM (M) 1847 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 Nalhati PS Case No. 349 dated June 22, 2024 u/s 302/201/34 of the IPC [GR Cse No. 1123
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. 71 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court)
CRM (M) 1847 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 Nalhati PS Case No. 349 dated June 22, 2024 u/s 302/201/34 of the IPC [GR Cse No. 1123 of 2024].
-And-
In the matter of : Maharaj Sk.
… Petitioner(s)
Mr. Subhabrata Datta Ms. Debjani Roy Chowdhury
… for the Petitioner(s)
Mr. Gouranga Kumar Das, APP Mr. Chandra Gupta Kamal
… for the State-respondent(s)
Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody from July, 2024 and there has hardly been any progress in the case. Only nine witnesses have been examined out of the 30 witnesses proposed to be examined by the prosecution. The petitioner is unnecessarily languishing in jail. State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner fled away and was arrested from Maharashtra. There are materials to suggest that the petitioner had a motive to terminate the life of the deceased. I have taken into account the materials appearing against the present petitioner; the manner in which the life of the deceased was terminated; the conduct of the present
2 petitioner as also the fact that the trial is progressing smoothly. Having regard the same and the conduct of the present petitioner who was arrested from Maharashtra, I am not inclined to grant bail to the present petitioner. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected. State is directed to expedite the process of trial. Accordingly, CRM (M) 1847 of 2026 is dismissed. 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.)