NAKASHIPARA P. S. CASE No. 88 of 2019 · Calcutta High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 302
Judgment
Mr. Kaustav Bagchi, Mr. Amarul Islam, Mr. Sourav Mukherjee, Mr. Debayan Ghosh. …for the Petitioner. … Petitioner. Mr. Sudip Ghosh, Mr. Bitasok Banerjee. ...for the State. Heard the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. Petitioner renews his prayer for bail. He submits that there is slow progress in the matter notwithstanding with the direction passed by this Court in CRM 6409 of 2021. . Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail. We have considered the materials on record. Petitioner was last seen with the victim and incriminating articles were recovered on his leading statement. Examination of prosecution witnesses are in progress. In view of the aforesaid facts, we are of the opinion this is not a fit case to grant bail to the petitioner. 2 Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Trial Court shall expedite the trial and conclude the same at an early date without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. (Bivas Pattanayak,J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.