PAIKAR POLICE STATION CASE No. 213 of 2020 · Calcutta High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 201, 302, 362
Key paragraphs
- Para 11. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they are in custody for more than three years. Accordingly, they renew their prayer for bail.
Judgment
Mr. Sabir Ahmed Mr. Tasnim Ahmed Ms. Suman Biswas Mr. Dhiman Banerjee Mr. Arijit Ganguly Mr. Sanjib Kumar Dan … … for the petitioners … … for the State
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they are in custody for more than three years. Accordingly, they renew their prayer for bail.
Learned Advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits 35 out of 36 witnesses have been examined.
We have considered the materials on record. Trial has substantially progressed. Allegations are grave and if proved would attract mandatory life imprisonment. Under such circumstances, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage.
The application for bail is thus rejected.
Trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at an early date.
Parties shall communicate a copy of this order to the trial court for due compliance. (Gaurang Kanth, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.) 2
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.