PUSHPENDU PATRA @ RAJ v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR
CRM(M)/1287/2026 · 2026-07-20
Tirthankar Ghosh
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 29035 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 29035 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
20.07.2026 Serial no. 458 [G.S.D]
CRM (M) 1287 of 2026
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 Barasat Government Railway PS Case No. 04 of 2024 dated 27.01.2024 u/s 363A/370/372/34 of the IPC, 1860 read with section 13 of the Foreigners Act.
-And-
In the matter of : Pushpendu Patra @Raj
… Petitioner(s)
Mr. Dattatreya Dutta Mr. Dibakar Sardar Mr. Monjit Bhattacharjee
… for the Petitioner(s)
Mr. Pradip Banerjee, ld. APP Ms. Anushka Ghosh
… for the State-respondent(s)
Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for more than two years five months and the till date the case has not been committed to the Court of Sessions. Learned advocate again submits that another accused has already been granted bail. Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail. I have taken into account the locus of the present petitioner who was identified by one of the victims in T.I. parade. The subject-matter of the case relates to, amongst other Sections, the provisions of Sections 370/Section 372 of the IPC along with Section 13 of the Foreigners Act.
2 Having considered the severity of the offence, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on ail without the evidence of the victim girls being recorded. Learned court, as such, is directed to commit the case to the Court of Sessions on 27th July, 2026. Learned Sessions Judge would, accordingly, take steps so that the stage of consideration of charges as well as the evidence of the victim girls – who are the vulnerable witnesses of the case, is completed within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the case records. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected. The petitioner would renew his prayer for bail after the evidence of the vulnerable witnesses is over. Accordingly, CRM (M) 1287 of 2026 is dismissed. 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