22.01.2025 Item no. 27. Court No.29. AB (Allowed) CRM (DB) 3018 of 2024 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 Khanakul Police Station Case No.407 of 2021 Dated 13.10.2021 under Sections 302/120B of the Indian Penal Code And In the matter of : Sk. Alauddin @ Alauddin Mallick @ Ala ……Petitioner. Md. Asraf Ali, Md. Golam Mohiuddin, Ms. Puja Mondal, Mr. Sankar Banerjee ……for the Petitioner. Mr. Antarikhya Basu, Mr. Nahid Ahmed ……for the State. Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J. 1. The petitioner renews his prayer for bail, which was rejected earlier on several occasions and lastly on September 21, 2023. He says that he is in judicial custody for more than three years and four months. On the ground of delay in trial, he renews his prayer for bail. 2. Learned State Advocate, referring to the status report dated January 10, 2025, filed before us, submits that there is very strong circumstantial evidence against the petitioner. 15 charge sheet named witnesses have already been examined. According to the learned Public Signed By : APURBA BANDYOPADHYAY High Court of Calcutta 22 nd of January 2025 05:02:43 PM 2 Prosecutor in-charge of the prosecution, the trial could be completed within the next one year. 3. We note that there is no eyewitness to the alleged incident of murder. The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. There are 39 charge sheet named witnesses. Only 15 of them have been examined till date. Therefore, 24 witnesses remain to be examined. It is highly unlikely that examination of 24 witnesses will be completed within one year. 4. We really see no possibility of an early conclusion of the trial. We have repeatedly said that the prosecution may have an iron-cast case to secure the conviction of an accused person. Nobody stands in the way of the prosecution doing so. However, an under-trial cannot be kept incarcerated for an indefinite period of time without taking the trial to its logical conclusion. 5. Three years four months is a very long period. Further, there is no likelihood of an early conclusion of the trial. Without touching the merits of the case and solely on the touchstone of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, we are constrained to allow the petitioner’s prayer for bail. 6. Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner, namely SK. ALAUDDIN @ ALAUDDIN MALLICK @ ALA shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/-, with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom 3 must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Arambagh, and on further conditions that he shall remain within the jurisdiction of the Arambagh Police Station and shall report to the Officer-in-Charge of the Arambagh Police Station twice a week until further orders. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. The application for bail is, accordingly, allowed. 10. 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.) 4