09.07.2026 Serial no. 19 [G.S.D] CRM (M) 2828 of 2025 In re : An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with Newton PS Case No. 253 of 2016 dated 15.05.2016 u/s 376(3)(f) of IPC and u/s 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, SPL case no. 335 of 2016. -And- In the matter of : Pintu Mistry … Petitioner(s) Mr. Akash Dutta … for the Petitioner(s) Mr. Gouranga Kr. Das, ld. APP Mr. Amal Kumar Datta … for the State-respondent(s) The incident complained of is of the year 2016. The petitioner was initially granted bail which was cancelled by the High Court. However, the petitioner was arrested in the year 2023 and, since then, he is in custody. It has been submitted that there has hardly been any progress during the period the petitioner was detained in custody and till date five witnesses have been examined. The records of the case speak that initially, charge- sheet was filed by the prosecution which reflects 10 witnesses have been relied upon by the prosecution, and includes two doctors and two police officers. Mr. Gouranga Kumar Das, learned APP, appears for the State along with a junior of his choice as per the direction of this court. The appointment of both Mr. Das and 2 the junior of his choice, if any, be regularized by the concerned authority. Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail. Having considered that at the relevant point of time the victim was 10-year-old and, initially, the conduct of the present petitioner for delaying the trial of the case after his bail was cancelled, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for releasing the petitioner on bail. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected. The petitioner would renew his prayer for bail after the period of six months. In the meantime, the learned Special Court is directed to complete rest of the witnesses without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties. Accordingly, CRM (M) 2828 of 2025 is dismissed. Report and the Memo of Evidence submitted by the State be kept with the record. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.) 3