03.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L. 280. Kausik (Rejected) CRM (M) 1776 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Haridevpur Police Station Case No. 58 of 2022 dated 09.03.2022 under Sections 302/394/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. And In the matter of : Debraj Roy ……Petitioner. Mr. Abu Zar Ali Mr. Sk. Md. Wasim Akram ……for the Petitioner. Mr. Kallol Mondal, Ld. PP Mr. Ayan Basu Mr. Goutam Banerjee ….for the State. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody for 4 years 5 months and till date out of 33 witnesses cited by the prosecution only 6 witnesses have been examined. Learned advocate submits that in spite of earlier directions there has been no progress in the case and there is no possibility of the trial being taken to its logical conclusion. As such, petitioner be released on bail. Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail emphasizing on the post-mortem report and the manner in 2 which the deceased was murdered. The evidence itself appearing in the case diary supports the last scene theory. The CCTV footages at least do corroborate the evidentiary value of the other witnesses who have been examined at the relevant point of time. I have taken into account the post-mortem report which speaks of the heinousness of the offence. It has also been contended on behalf of the State that the delay in examination of the witnesses cannot be attributed to the prosecution itself in view of the presiding officers not being present for a considerable period of time. Immediately after the presiding officer joined the trial court no stones were left unturned and 7 witnesses were tendered whose deposition has been completed. Having considered the heinousness of the offence some more time is granted. Prosecution will complete the vulnerable witnesses within a period of 6 months. Petitioner would renew his prayer for bail after the aforesaid period of 6 months is over. At this stage, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Accordingly, CRM (M) 1776 of 2026 is dismissed. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. 3 Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)