37 29-01-2025 (ct. no. 29) KOLE Allowed CRM (DB) 3358 of 2024 In re: An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 483 of the BNSS in connection with Nakashipara Police Station Case No. 317 of 2024 dated 04.04.2024 under Sections 147/148/149/326/307/302 of the Indian Penal Code. - A n d - In the matter of : Yeamin Sk @ Iyamin Sk .... Petitioner. Mr. Sandipan Chakraborty, Mr. Balaram Dutta, Mr. Kaustav Das, … For the Petitioner. Mr. Soumik Ganguli, Ms. Chandreyi Dutta, … For the State. Mr. Ayan Kr. Bhattachayya, Ms. S. Khatun,, ….for the defacto complainant. Order dictated by Apurba Sinha Ray, J.: 1. The petitioner claims that he is in custody for about ten months. The wife and the son of the deceased who were travelling along with the deceased and his brother did not name the present petitioner as an accused in their statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As the important witnesses did not state the name of the present petitioner as an accused, he may be enlarged on bail on any condition. There is no chance of an early conclusion of the trial since there are 29 charge sheet named witnesses. The investigation is complete. Charge sheet has been submitted and as such there is no need for further custodial detention of the present petitioner. 2. Learned State Advocate vehemently opposes the bail prayer. He says that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner. He points out that though the wife and the son of the deceased did not name the present petitioner at 2 the time of recording statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the brother of the deceased has categorically named the petitioner at the time of recording his statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the learned Trial Court. Therefore, it cannot be said that there was no material against the petitioner. 7 other accused persons have been absconding and for which necessary steps have been taken to split up the trial. The prosecution will complete the trial as early as possible. 3. We have considered the materials on record. We find that the present petitioner was not named by the wife and the son of the deceased at the time of recording their statements under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The prosecution has relied upon a statement of the brother of the deceased. However, the statement of the brother of the deceased names several persons including the petitioner herein but does not ascribe any specific overt act to the petitioner. 4. However, considering the period of detention and also the fact that there is no chance of an early conclusion of the trial, we are inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 5. Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner, namely, Yeamin Sk @ Iyamin Sk, shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/-, with two registered sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadia subject to condition that he shall appear before the trial court on every date of hearing until further orders and shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever and on further condition that the petitioner while on bail shall not enter the jurisdiction of the Nakashipara Police Station except for the 3 purpose of attending court proceedings and shall meet the jurisdictional I.C of the concerned Police Station where he will reside once in every week until further orders. 6. 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. 7. The application for bail is, accordingly, allowed. 8. 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. )