Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/1818/2026 of D. TRINATH RAO @ CHANTI @ D. TRINATH Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 10 September 2026
no. 21 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court) CRM (M) 1818 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 Kharagpur (Town) PS Case No. 502 of 2023 dated 06.11.2023 u/s 498A/302/304B/34 of the
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.
10.09.2026 Serial no. 21 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court)
CRM (M) 1818 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 Kharagpur (Town) PS Case No. 502 of 2023 dated 06.11.2023 u/s 498A/302/304B/34 of the IPC read with Section 3/4 of the DP Act.
-And-
In the matter of : D. Trinath Rao @ Chanti @ D. Trinath
… Petitioner(s)
Mr. Amit Ranjan Pati Ms. Swastika Choudhury Ms. Itika Nag Mr. Avijit Chatterjee
… for the Petitioner(s)
Mr. Soumak Bera Mr. Dipayan Dan
… for the State-respondent(s)
Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for two years ten months and out of the 15 witnesses cited in the charge-sheet, till date, not a single witness has been examined. Therefore, learned advocate prays that the petitioner may be released on bail on any stringent conditions. Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and draws the attention of the court to the postmortem report which reflects manual strangulation to death and the place of occurrence is the bed room of the matrimonial home.
Having considered the overall circumstances, I am of not inclined to enlarge the petitioner being the husband on bail. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected. However, considering the period of detention of the present petitioner, one year time is granted to the prosecution to complete all the witnesses. The petitioner will renew his prayer for bail after the aforesaid time period is over. The learned trial court would release the petitioner on bail provided, the evidence of the witnesses is not completed inspite of cooperation extended by the accused persons. Accordingly, CRM (M) 1818 of 2026 is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, is also disposed of. 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.)