25.08.2026 Court No.35. D/L.984. Rakib (Allowed) CRM (M) 1440 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with A.J.C. Bose B. Garden Police Station case no. 209 of 2024 dated 10.11.2024 under Sections 143/93/98/137/61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 75/81 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. And In the matter of : Jyotsna Mondal @ Jyotshna Mondal ……Petitioner. Mr. Sekhar Kumar Basu, Sr. Adv, Mr. Prabir Kumar Mukherjee Mr. Sayan Mukherjee Ms. Rimisha Bhadra .....for the Petitioner. Mr. Kallol Mondal, Ld. PP Mr. L. Vishal Kumar Mr. Neel Chakraborty ……for the State. In the earlier order dated 13.08.2026 the cause title has been inadvertently recorded as “CRM (NDPS) 1440 of 2026”, the same is incorrect and should correctly read as “CRM (M) 1440 of 2026”. Learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody for one year eight months and earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected on 31.03.2026, till date 10 witnesses have been examined out of 27 witnesses cited by the prosecution. It has been claimed that petitioner’s complicity in the offence is on the basis of statement of co-accused and no substantial materials has surfaced which can be treated to be admissible evidence. 2 Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail. I have taken into account the materials appearing against the present petitioner. One of the police officer who was a party to the seizure at the relevant point of time when the second baby was recovered from the residence of one Vijoy Sonthalia, claims that it was on the basis of the leading statement of the present petitioner the raiding team had been to the flat of Vijoy Sonthalia. So far as the seizure list is concerned, there is no signature of the present petitioner. The chain of circumstances also do not reflect that there were other witnesses who would trace out relating to the biological parents of the baby which was recovered or there are other independent witnesses who would suggest regarding the complicity of the present petitioner. Repeated opportunities were granted to the State. Having regard to the period of detention of the present petitioner and the materials which have surfaced till date, I am of the opinion that further detention of the present petitioner is unwarranted. As such, prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. Accordingly, the petitioner, namely, Jyotsna Mondal @ Jyotshna Mondal shall be released on bail upon furnishing bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each, one of whom must be local to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Howrah. If on bail, the petitioner shall be physically present on each and every date before the learned Trial Court and shall not leave the 3 jurisdiction of district of Howrah without prior permission of the learned Trial Court. With the aforesaid observations, CRM (M) 1440 of 2026 is allowed. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)