Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 27043 (CAL)

DIPAK SARNAKAR v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM(M)/2831/2025 · 2026-07-09

Tirthankar Ghosh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

09.07.2026 Court No.35. D/L. 24. Kausik (Rejected) CRM (M) 2831 of 2025 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Ranaghat Police Station Case No. 626 of 2024 dated 25.07.2024 under sections 103(1), 238(a) of the BNS, 2023. And In the matter of : Dipak Sarnakar ……Petitioner. Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sudeshna Chanda ….for the Petitioner. Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Soumya Nag Ms. Nandini Chatterjee ….for the Defacto Complainant. Mr. Sagar Saha …for the State. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since July 2024 and is in custody for about 2 years. Only 17 witnesses till date have been examined out of the 26 witnesses cited in the first charge sheet. Additionally, it has been contended that last of the witnesses was examined in January 2026 and the trial of the case has stagnated. As such, the petitioner may be released on bail. Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the offending weapon was recovered on the leading statement of the present petitioner and the place 2 from where recovery of the weapon was made is adjacent to the nursery of the present petitioner. Learned advocate for the defacto complainant is present and opposes the prayer for bail and submits that prosecution has submitted supplementary charge sheet. There are C.C.T.V. footages, seizures being effected and the trial is progressing at a smooth pace. Having considered the totality of the circumstances, complicity of the petitioner and the manner in which the trial is progressing, I am of the view that, this is not a fit case for granting bail at this stage. As such, prayer for bail of the petitioner in CRM (M) 2831 of 2025 is dismissed. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial by fixing regular schedules. Mr. Sagar Saha, learned advocate appears on behalf of the State. His appearance be regularized by the concerned authorities. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)