Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 45709 (CAL)

MD. RAHUL AMIN @ MD. RUHUL AMIN v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM(M)/2448/2026 · 2026-09-29

Tirthankar Ghosh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

29.09.2026 Serial no. 494 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court) CRM (M) 2448 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 Raiganj Cyber Crime Police Station No. 5 of 2025 dated July 22, 2025 u/s 67B of the IT Act, 2000 read with sections 14/15 of the POCSO Act -And- In the matter of : Md. Rahul Amin @ Md. Ruhul Amin … Petitioner(s) Mr. Himanshu De Mr. Navanil De Mr. Shoumilya Mazumder Ms. Mamta Karua … for the Petitioner(s) Mr. Amitabha Karmakar Mr. Arup Kumar Bhowmick … for the State-respondent(s) Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for about two months and charge- sheet has already been submitted before the learned jurisdictional court, as such, he prays that the petitioner may be released on bail. State opposes the prayer for bail but on a specific query from this court, he submits that Supplementary charge-sheet would be submitted on receipt of the FSL. Having considered that there is no further possibility of the progress of the criminal case till the report is received, I am of the opinion that further custodial detention of the present petitioner is unwarranted. 2 Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Allowed. Accordingly, the petitioner viz, Md. Rahul Amin @ Md. Ruhul Amin 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 Judge, Special Court under POCSO Act, Raiganj, Uttar Dinajpur. If on bail, the petitioner shall also make himself physically available on each and every date so fixed by the learned Special court/trial court and shall not leave the district of Uttar Dinajpur without prior permission of the learned Special court/trial court or the court in seisin of the case. Accordingly, CRM (M) 2448 of 2026 is allowed. Pending application(s), if any, is also disposed of. 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.) 3