14.09.2026 Item no. 2 Ct. No.237 AKG C.R.R. 4270 of 2025 Akbar Mondal Vs. The State of West Bengal Mr. Swakshar Mondal, Ms. Chandrima Debnath …for the Petitioner Mr. Subasish Pachhal, Ms. Moumita Pandit …for the State Mr. Jissan I. Hossain …for the Private Respondent The petitioner challenges the order dated July 22, 2025, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Murshidabad, in connection with Sagarpara Police Station Case No. 464 of 2024, dated November 20, 2024, under Sections 103(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The aforesaid case was initiated on the basis of a complaint lodged by the petitioner on November 20, 2024. It was alleged in the FIR that his brother, namely, Tajimuddin Mondal, had left his house on November 19, 2024 for Devipur Bazar to attend the Rashmela, but did not return home. Subsequently, his dead body was found at Sipahirchak, beside the roadside near a culvert. It was further alleged that a quarrel had taken place between the petitioner's brother and the opposite parties during the last Panchayat election. The petitioner, therefore, expressed his suspicion that the opposite parties had murdered his brother. 2 It appears that, initially, opposite party nos. 5 and 3 made confessional statements before the investigating agency, stating that they, along with certain other persons, had murdered the petitioner's brother. Subsequently, however, both of them retracted from their respective statements. In the course of investigation, it was ultimately found that the petitioner's brother had died as a result of a motorbike accident. One Indrajit Halder was allegedly driving the motorcycle at the relevant point of time. The investigating agency accordingly submitted a charge-sheet against Indrajit Halder under Sections 106/281/125(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The charge-sheet is accompanied by the post-mortem report of the deceased. Upon investigation, the investigating agency found that opposite party nos. 1 to 5 had no involvement in the alleged murder of the petitioner's brother. The protest petition filed before the learned Magistrate does not disclose any material ground warranting further investigation. The allegation that the investigating agency, in collusion with opposite party nos. 1 to 5, deliberately failed to submit a charge-sheet against them is wholly unsupported by any material or documentary evidence. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Magistrate. Accordingly, CRR 4270 of 2025 is dismissed. 3 Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities. (Kausik Chanda, J.)