Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 33142 (CAL)

SK MOHOSIN v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM(M)/1033/2026 · 2026-08-19

Tirthankar Ghosh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

19.08.2026 Serial no. 45 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court) CRM (M) 1033 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 Pandua PS Case No. 760 of 2025 dated 09.10.2025 u/s 103(1) of the BNS, 2023 [GR No. 3239 of 2025]. -And- In the matter of : Sk Mohosin … Petitioner(s) Mr. Priyankar Ganguly Mr. A. D. Gupta … for the Petitioner(s) Mr. Rajendra Banerjee, ld. APP Mr. Sankalpa Bhattacharjee … for the State-respondent(s) Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with the instant case and there are no injuries as is reflected from the charge-sheet. Mr. Banerjee, 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. Banrjee and the junior of his choice, if any, be regularized by the concerned authority. Learned advocate for the State produces the case diary and points out that in this case son has murdered his father and the post mortem report reflects injuries relating to physical assault. 2 Having considered the same, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected. Accordingly, CRM (M) 1033 of 2026 is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, is also disposed of. Memo of evidence submitted 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.)