24.07.2026 Serial no. 5 [G.S.D] CRM (M) 1393 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 Chandipur PS Case No. 404 of 2024 dated 29.10.2024 u/s 318(4) of the BNS, 2023[ Corresponding to S.T. Case No. 261 of 2025 and Sessions case no. 50 of 2025]. -And- In the matter of : Mojammel Haque … Petitioner(s) Mr. Ayan Bhattacharjee, Sr Adv. Mr. Kaushik Choudhury Mr. Dwaipayan Panda … for the Petitioner(s) Mr. Kallol Mondal, ld. PP Dr. Pradip Banerjee, ld. APP Mr. Moyukh Mukherjee Mr. Kalidas Saha … for the State-respondent(s) Learned Senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for one year eight months and out of the 56 witnesses cited, only six witnesses have been examined. So far as the complicity of the present petitioner is concerned, according to the learned Senior advocate, it is only restricted to seizure of photographs of Aadhar Card downloaded from the mobile phone of the present petitioner. Learned Senior advocate also refers to the order dated 14.07.2026 passed by the learned trial court wherein it reflects that the prosecution has been slow in progressing with the trial proceedings. 2 Mr. Mondal, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the State, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that number of fake accounts was created by the present petitioner in the name of different individuals. The said bank account holders were paid rents and the petitioner has been the beneficiaries of such accounts. It has also been contended that the case has serious ramifications in view of the project of the Government where electronic gadgets and, to that effect, a sum of Rs.10,000/- were allotted per student. However, the investigation reveals that Rs. 10,000/- were credited to these fake accounts and, thereafter, money was diverted. The prosecution accuses the present petitioner for having complicity with such bank accounts and withdrawal of the amounts from the said accounts. Having regard to the Scheme of the Government being failed; the complicity of the present petitioner as also the fact that the prosecution is yet to complete the relevant witnesses, at this stage, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected. Accordingly, CRM (M) 1393 of 2026 is dismissed. The learned trial court has already expressed its displeasure regarding the progress of the case. Accordingly, 3 it is directed that the prosecution would put in efforts to expedite the progress of the case by producing the relevant witnesses on the date fixed by the learned trial court. 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.)