23.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L.883. Rakib (Allowed) CRM (M) 1962 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 Suri Police Station case no. 60 of 2026 dated 27.01.2026 under Sections 69/115(2)/351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhits, 2023. And In the matter of : Sk. Rafiqul @ Sekh Rafikul ……Petitioner. Mr. Kunal Ganguly Mr. Subhodip Maity .....for the Petitioner. Mr. Kaustav Shome Mr. Kuntal Roy ……for the State. Affidavit-of-service filed by the petitioner be kept with the record. In spite of service being effected none appears on behalf of the de-facto complainant. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody for more than seven months, charge-sheet has already been submitted before the jurisdictional Court and date has been fixed for consideration of charges. However, witness action has not commenced. As such, petitioner be released on bail. Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail, drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS. 2 I have taken into account the same and is of the opinion that the victim at the relevant point of time was aged about 30 years and was able to understand the consequences of her act. Having considered the same, I am of the opinion that further custodial detention of the present petitioner is unwarranted. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. Accordingly, the petitioner, namely, Sk. Rafiqul @ Sekh Rafikul 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, Suri, Birbhum. If on bail, the petitioner shall be physically present on each and every date before the learned Trial Court in seisin of the case and shall not leave the jurisdiction of district of Birbhum without prior permission of the learned trial Court in seisin of the case. Thus, CRM (M) No. 1962 of 2026 is allowed. Memo of evidence submitted by the State be kept with the record. 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.)