01.9.2025 Court No.4 Item No.10 Samarpita Allowed CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CRM (M) 234 of 2025 In Re: - An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Surakha Sanhita, 2023 And In the matter of: Ajay Bind & Ors. ….Petitioners. Mr. Jagriti Mishra Mr. Debashri Dhar Ms. Mrinmayee Das …for the petitioners. Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, Ld. A.P.P. Mr. Ujjal Luksom ….for the State. 1. It is said on behalf of the petitioners that they are completely innocent and have been falsely entangled with the offence alleged. The entire allegations against the present petitioners are baseless and imaginary one. It is said that the procedure given under the Code in respect of search and seizure was not followed by the complainant and the search procedure completely vitiates the process of search and seizure so far as the law provided. The investigation process has already been completed by submitting charge sheet by the prosecuting agency and as such, no purpose will be served by detaining further of the accused petitioner behind the bar. 2. It is submitted on behalf of the State that Rs. 10,00,000/- (Ten Lakh) Counterfeit Indian Currency Notes were recovered from the possession of the accused petitioners. There are sufficient materials in the record which shows about prima 2 facie involvement of the accused petitioners with the alleged offence and if at the stage this accused petitioners are enlarged on bail then there is every possibility of hampering of the trial and this accused petitioner may abscond. 3. The instance case was started on the basis of a complaint lodged by the defacto complainant stating, inter alia, that upon source information the defacto complainant and his team arrived at Coochbehar Railway Station and intercepted these petitioners who are going to Bihar through DN Vivek Express in general compartment with Rs. 10,00,000/- counterfeit/forged Indian currencies and the same were recovered and seized in the presence of the Executive Magistrate. Anyway the investigation in connection with this case has already been completed by submitting charge sheet by the prosecuting agency and there is no immediate chance for commencement of trial. Moreover, this accused petitioner is in custody since for a considerable period. So, I find that no purpose will be served by detaining this accused petitioner behind the bar further. 4. Accordingly, these petitioners namely (1) Ajay Bind, Pappu Kumar and (3) Guddu Kumar are enlarged on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each amongst which one is to be local subject to the satisfaction of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Cooch Behar, subject to the condition that the petitioners shall meet the Investigating Officer once in a week until further orders and they 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. 5. In the event the petitioners fail to appear before the trial court without a justifiable cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel their bail in accordance with law, without any further reference to this Court. 3 6. Accordingly, this criminal appeal being CRM (M) 234 of 2025 is hereby allowed. 7. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for. (Prasenjit Biswas, J.)