19.02.2025 Item no. 34. Court No.29. AB (Allowed) CRM (DB) 75 of 2025 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Shakespeare Sarani Police Station Case No.173 of 2021 Dated 02.11.2021 under Section 302/394 of the Indian Penal Code And In the matter of : Dudh Kumar Dhal @ Suman @ Sonu ……Petitioner. Mr. Navanil De, Mr. Srinjan Ghosh ……for the Petitioner. Ms. Sonali Das Ms. Dona Sanyal ……for the State. Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J. 1. Status report filed by the State, be kept with the records. 2. It appears from the report that the prosecution intends to examine 42 out of 60 charge sheet named witnesses. Only 6 witnesses have been examined in full. It is anybody’s guess when the trial will conclude. The petitioner is in custody for more than three years and three months. 3. Learned State Advocate tells us that the allegation is serious. There is sufficient incriminating evidence against this petitioner. He had killed a 91 year old lady by smothering her with pillow and had looted valuables. The valuables were recovered from his possession. Although the case is based on circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances is complete. Signed By : APURBA BANDYOPADHYAY High Court of Calcutta 19 th of February 2025 06:05:53 PM 2 4. We have repeatedly said that the prosecution may have the strongest possible case against an accused person. Nobody stops the prosecution from securing the accused person’s conviction by ensuring an early conclusion of the trial so that the guilty person can be punished in accordance with law. However, no accused person can be kept in judicial custody indefinitely without there being progress in the trial. 5. In the present case, we find that only six prosecution witnesses have been examined in full over the last three years and three months. The State proposes to examine 36 more witnesses. It is impossible to conclude the trial on an early date or within a reasonable period of time. 6. Accordingly, without touching the merits of the case and solely on the plinth of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, we feel constrained to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner, namely DUDH KUMAR DHAL @ SUMAN @ SONU shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/-, with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 1st Fast Track Court, Bichar Bhavan, Calcutta, and on further conditions that he shall remain within the jurisdiction of the Bichar Bhawan, Kolkata and shall report to the Officer-in-Charge of the Hare Street Police Station on every alternate day until further orders. 3 8. The petitioner shall appear before the trial court on every date of hearing until further orders and shall not intimidate the witnesses and/or tamper with evidence and/or commit any cognizable offence in any manner whatsoever. 9. In the event the petitioner fails to adhere to any of the conditions stipulated above without justifiable cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the petitioner’s bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court. 10. The application for bail is, accordingly, allowed. 11. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.) (Arijit Banerjee, J.)