17.01.2025 Item no. 33. Court No.29. AB (Allowed) CRM (DB) 3309 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 Paikar Police Station Case No.59 of 2023 Dated 07.03.2023 under Sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code And In the matter of : Sofikul Islam @ Safikul Islam ……Petitioner. Mr. Sabir Ahamed, Md. Kutubuddin, Mr. Tasnim Ahmed, Mr. Dhiman Banerjee ……for the Petitioner. Mr. Suman De, Mrs. Rita Dutta ……for the State. Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J. 1. Report filed by the State, be kept with the records. 2. From the report we do not find that the delay in the progress of the trial can be attributed to the petitioner to any extent. 3. The petitioner is in custody for about two years and one month. Only 2 out of 31 charge sheet named witnesses have been examined. In the report filed by the State, it is mentioned that the prosecution intends to examine all 31 witnesses. Hence, there is zero possibility of an early conclusion of the trial. Signed By : APURBA BANDYOPADHYAY High Court of Calcutta 17 th of January 2025 05:47:14 PM 2 4. Learned State Counsel, while opposing the prayer for bail, says that the petitioner’s prayer for bail was rejected earlier on merits on January 19, 2024. 5. The petitioner’s prayer may have been rejected on merits before. However, since then, over the last one year, there has been no appreciable progress in the trial. The petitioner is in judicial custody for a prolonged period of time without there being any progress in the trial. At this pace, it is anybody’s guess as to when the trial will conclude. 6. Keeping in mind the paramount importance of a citizen’s fundamental right to personal liberty and speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, without touching the merits of the case and solely on the ground of inordinate delay in progress of the trial, coupled with no possibility of an early conclusion of the trial, we feel constrained to allow the petitioner’s prayer for bail. 7. Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner, namely SOFIKUL ISLAM @ SAFIKUL ISLAM 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampurhat, Birbhum, and on further conditions that he shall remain within the jurisdiction of the Rampurhat Police Station and shall 3 report to the Officer-in-Charge of the Rampurhat Police Station once in a fortnight until further orders. 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. (Arijit Banerjee, J.) (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.) 4