07.08.2026 Serial no. 93 [G.S.D] CRM (M) 58 of 2025 In the matter of : Prasanta Kumar Gayen … Petitioner(s) Mr. Amitabha Ghosh Ms. Arpita Paul Biswas … for the Petitioner(s) Mr. Bankim Pal … for the State The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 26.09.2024 wherein the learned ACJM, Baruipur granted bail to the accused/opposite parties on the ground that charge-sheet was submitted and the learned APP did not oppose the prayer for bail. It has also been submitted that the offence which was suffered by the defacto-complainant and his family members would be reflected in the injury reports. To that effect, the learned advocate draws the attention of the court to various injury reports which have been enclosed along with the application. The attention of this court has also been drawn to the complaint and the statement of the witnesses to emphasize the role of the accused/opposite parties. It is added that a prayer for further investigation was allowed. Learned advocate for the State submits that the first charge-sheet was submitted on 31.12.2022 and the second charge-sheet was submitted on 9th January, 2025. I have taken into account the submission and the agony of the petitioner relating to arrogant behavior of the accused persons. The injury reports which have been presented before this court reflects injuries having been suffered. 2 However, so far as the order of the learned Magistrate is concerned, the same was on the foundation of two reasons: first, the case is Magistrate triable and the second is voluntariness of the accused for surrendering before the learned jurisdictional court. Having considered the reasons assigned by the learned Magistrate, I am of the opinion that, at this belated stage, it would be unwise to interfere with the impugned order of bail without additional materials since the petitioners are on bail for more than one and half years. However, the conduct of the accused/opposite parties, who were present at the relevant point of time when the incident was reported to the police station, is not encouraging for continuance of civil life, as such, if any further information is furnished before the learned Magistrate and/or the Court in seisin of the present case, the learned jurisdictional court will assess regarding the genuinity of the accusations, thereafter, will not hesitate to pass directions upon the accused/opposite parties to stay outside the jurisdiction of the said police station. Accordingly, no interference is called for in respect of the bail order. With the aforesaid observations, CRM (M) 58 of 2025 is disposed of. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.) 3