S/L-48 to 50 25-08-2026 Ct-8 KOLE 266464 CRA (DB) 189 of 2023 With CRM (M) 448 of 2026 With GA 14 of 2023 In the matter of : Firoza Bibi …….. appellant. Mr. Soumya Nag, Mr. Karan Bapuli, … for the appellant In CRA (DB) 189 of 2023. Mr. Uday Sakar Chattopadhyay, Ms. T. Rakshit, Ms. R. Tah, Ms. A. Datta, Ms. B. Chakraborty, Ms. S. Parveen, … for the petitioner In CRM (M) 448 of 2026. Mr. Krishnendu Bhattacharya, Ms. S. Banerjee, … for the State In CRM (M) 448 of 2026. Mr. Dilip Kumar Sadhu, … for the respondent no.5 In CRA (DB) 189 of 2023 and For the respondent no. 4 in GA 14 of 2023. Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J:- In RE: CRM (M) 448 of 2026 The petitioner is one of the accused persons in this case. He absconded for eight years. The other accused persons faced trial and were acquitted by the learned Trial Court. The State as well as the defacto complainant preferred separate appeals being CRA (DB) 189 of 2023 and GA 14 of 2023. The petitioner was subsequently apprehended and is in custody. The trial could not proceed against him since the records of the case are in this Court. The petitioner applied 2 for bail before the learned Single Judge. Since the two appeals are pending before us and the records are before us, the learned Single Judge directed that the bail application be placed before us. That is why the petitioner’s bail application has been listed before us. The petitioner says that he is languishing in custody for two and half years. Trial has not even started. He was actually not absconding. He was saving his own life. His father was murdered and his house was ransacked by miscreants. He fled from his native place. Learned State Advocate opposes the prayer. He says that an accused person who absconded for eight years cannot be trusted. The records of the case may be sent down to learned Trial Court so that trial against the petitioner may be conducted. The trial may be expedited. Bail should not be granted to the petitioner. We have considered the rival contentions of the parties. We are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. It is likely that he will again disappear if we grant him bail. His conduct does not entitle him to the privilege of bail. CRM (M) 448 of 2026 stands dismissed. We see that paper book in connection with these two appeals is ready. The Department shall make photocopy of the entire trial court records and retain the same with the records of the two appeals. The original trial court records be sent down to the learned Trial Court once the entire set is photocopied so that the trial may proceed against the present 3 petitioner. Let this exercise be completed within three weeks from date. Since the petitioner is in custody for about two and half years, we direct the learned trial court to expedite the trial to the fullest extent possible and conclude the same as early as possible, without granting unnecessary adjournments and if necessary, by fixing frequent schedules for examination of witnesses. We are conscious that normally no time period should be fixed for conclusion of a trial. However, in the peculiar facts of this case, we request the learned Trial Court to complete the trial within one year from the date of receipt of trial court records. IN RE: CRA (DB) 189 of 2023 and GA 14 of 2023:- Let these two appeals be placed in the combined Monthly List of October, 2026. ( Arijit Banerjee, J. ) (Rishad Medora, J.)