BONGAON P.S. CASE No. 359 of 2022 · Calcutta High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- ARIJIT BANERJEE, APURBA SINHA RAY
Provisions considered
Judgment
Mr. S. Bhattacharya ……for the Petitioners. Mr. Joydeep Roy, Mr. Arani Bhattacharya ……for the State. Mr. Arnab Chatterjee, Ms. Poulami Bose, Ms. Dhanasree Biswas …..for the Defacto complainant. The petitioners renew their prayer for bail, which was lastly rejected by an order dated January 11, 2024, passed by a Coordinate Bench in CRM (DB) 69 of 2024. The petitioners say that they are in custody for about two years two months. Only 3 out of 13 witnesses have been examined. There is no chance of an early conclusion of the trial. The mother in law of the victim lady has been enlarged on bail. They are similarly circumstanced. They should be granted bail. Learned Advocates for the State and the defacto complainant, while opposing the prayer for bail, draw our attention to the material in the case diary. We find from statements of witnesses recorded that there is sufficient prima Signed By : APURBA BANDYOPADHYAY High Court of Calcutta 8 th of July 2024 05:29:16 PM 2 facie incriminating evidence against these petitioners. It cannot be said that they are similarly circumstanced as the mother-in- law of the victim lady, who has been granted bail. In view of the available material against the petitioners, we are not inclined to allow their prayer for bail, at this stage. The prayer for bail is, accordingly, rejected. CRM (DB) 1890 of 2024 is dismissed. However, keeping in mind that the petitioners have been in custody for two years and two months, we direct the learned Trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible and positively within six months from the next date fixed for recording of evidence, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. We clarify that in the event the trial is not concluded within the time period as indicated above, the petitioners will be at liberty to renew their prayer for bail. The parties shall communicate this order to the learned Trial Court. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Arijit Banerjee, J.) (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.) 3
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.