Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/598/2026 of ASAD RAZA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 10 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.M/L.17 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected C.R.M. (M) 598 of 2026 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Bidhannagar Cyber Crime Police Station Case
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
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.M/L.17
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected C.R.M. (M) 598 of 2026
In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, filed in connection with Bidhannagar Cyber Crime Police Station Case No. 84 of 2025 dated 23.07.2025 under Sections 318(4)/319(2)/336(3)/336(4)/338/34(2)/61(2)/316(5)/111(2)( b)/111(3)/111(4)/317(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Sections 66/66(C)/66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
And
In Re : Asad Raza
... Petitioner.
Mr. Kaushik Modak, Ms. Moushumi Pal, Mr. Sk. Mustafi Rahaman
... For the Petitioner.
Mr. Shataroop Purkayastha, Mr. Neel Chakraborty
... For the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner prays for bail of the petitioner. Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner being an employee of Bandhan Bank has divulged personal information of the customers and the account holders pursuant to which fraudsters have siphoned of the amount. Having considered the complicity of the present petitioner in the alleged offence being an employee of the Bank and joining hands with fraudsters, I am of the opinion that the trust which was placed upon the petitioner as an integral part of the banking system has been misused. Considering the gravity of the offence and sufferance of the customers of Bandhan Bank, I am of the opinion that petitioner has failed to make out any case for being released on bail. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Memo of Evidence submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record. The application for bail, being CRM (M) 598 of 2026, is, thus, dismissed. 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.)