Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/1913/2026 of SANATAN PRAMANIK Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 11 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.136 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Allowed C.R.M. (M) 1913 of 2026 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
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.
11.09.2026
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.136
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Allowed C.R.M. (M) 1913 of 2026
In Re : An Application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Falta Police Station Case No. 130 of 2026 dated 18.05.2026 under Sections 126(2)/117(2)/118(2)/ 305(b)/109/308(4)/310(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (G.R. Case No. 1551 of 2026).
And
In Re : Sanatan Pramanik
... Petitioner.
Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay, Ms. Rajashree Tah, Ms. Trisha Rakshit, Ms. Aishwarya Datta, Ms. Sadia Parveen, Ms. Bidisha Chakraborty
... For the Petitioner.
Mr. Debajyoti Adhikary, Ms. Priyanka Chandra
... For the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for about 100 days and the incident complained of is of the year 2021. Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner at the relevant point of time created terror. I have taken into account the relevant provisions under which the petitioner has been charged. Having regard to the period of detention of the petitioner, I am of the view that further detention of the present petitioner in connection with the instant case is unwarranted. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed.
2 Accordingly, the petitioner viz., Sanatan Pramanik shall be released on bail upon furnishing bond of Rs.20,000/-, with two sureties of Rs.10,000/- each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Diamond Harbour. If on bail, the petitioner shall be physically present on each and every date before the learned Trial Court and shall not leave the jurisdiction of the district of South 24-Parganas without prior permission of the learned Trial Court. Memo of Evidence submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record. The application for bail, being CRM (M) 1913 of 2026, is, thus, disposed of. All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly 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.)