05.10.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.66 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Allowed C.R.M. (M) 1711 of 2026 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Goghat Police Station Case No. 487 of 2025 dated 01.11.2025 under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (G.R. Case No. 1975 of 2025). And In Re : Raju Maity ... Petitioner. Mr. Satadru Lahiri, Mr. Md. Zeeshan Uddin ... For the Petitioner. Mr. Biswajit Tiwari, Ms. Sanjana Jha ... For the State. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody for 11 months, charge-sheet has been submitted, case has been committed to the court of sessions and charges have already been framed. However, witness action has not commenced. Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner struck the vital blow upon the deceased. Records reflect that there was a dispute on the issue of eating of eggs after the puja celebration was complete and over this dispute, the present petitioner by snatching the stick of a handicapped person assaulted over the ear of the deceased which resulted in death immediately. 2 I have taken into account the overall materials appearing in the case diary and I find that there was suddenness in the incident which has taken place. Having considered the same, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. Accordingly, the petitioner viz., Raju Maity shall be released on bail upon furnishing bond of Rs.20,000/-, with two sureties of Rs.10,000/- each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Arambagh, Hooghly. If on bail, the petitioner shall be physically present on each and every date before the learned Trial Court and shall not leave the jurisdiction of the district of Hooghly without prior permission of the learned Trial Court. The observations made above are only restricted for adjudication of the bail application and should not be considered a final opinion on the merits of the case. Memo of Evidence and the statements submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record. The application for bail, being CRM (M) 1711 of 2026, is, thus, disposed of. All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly 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.)