10.09.2026 Serial no. 41 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court) CRM (M) 1159 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 Karimpur PSCase No. 33 of 2024 dated 12.02.2024 u/s 302/120B of the IPC arising out of SC Case No. 147 of 2024. -And- In the matter of : Aasrab Mandal @ Asrab Mondal … Petitioner(s) Mr. Rudradipta Nandy Mr. Asraf Mondal … for the Petitioner(s) Mr. Gurudas Mitra Mr. Utsav Dutta … for the State-respondent(s) Mr. Sandip Chakraborty Mr. Amanul Islam Mr. Sourav Mukherjee Mr. Kaustav Das Ms. Payel Das … for the defacto-complainant State has submitted a report enclosing FSL. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for two years seven months and out of the 24 witnesses cited in the charge-sheet, only the evidence of first witnesses is in progress, as such, there is no possibility of the trial being concluded very soon. Learned advocate for the defacto-complainant opposes the prayer for bail and insists on the mode and manner in which the offence has been committed. Learned advocate for the State while opposing the prayer for bail submits that the delay was not because of the 2 prosecution but for the reasons beyond the control of the prosecution. Be that as it may, on perusal of the FSL report, I am of the opinion that some more opportunity must be granted to the prosecution. Considering the nature of the accusations against the present petitioner, at this stage, I am not inclined to grant bail to the present petitioner. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected. However, it is reiterated that there is absurd reluctance in proceeding with the trial. The SDPO/DSP having the authority over the Karimpur police station would monitor the progress of the case and ensure that the witnesses are present on the date fixed. The learned trial court is directed to fix two schedules in a month and also ensure that if a witness appears for deposition, his/her examination will continue on day to day basis till his/her examination-in-chief and cross- examination is complete. No unnecessary adjournment be granted to any of the parties and the trial of the case would continue inspite of any resolution of the local bar so that within the next six months at the least the witnesses who are not associated with the Government department is completed. 3 The petitioner will renew his prayer for bail after the aforesaid time period is over. Accordingly, CRM (M) 1159 of 2026 is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, is also disposed of. State is directed to communicate this order both to the concerned superior officer as also the learned trial court. 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.)