30.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L.25. Rakib (Rejected) CRM (M) 2010 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 S.T.F. (H.Q) Police Station case no. 6 of 2025 dated 14.07.2025 under Sections 111(1)/111(3)/111(4)/111(7)/318(4)/319(2)/336(3)/338/340(1)/34 0(2)/61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 66C/66D of the Information Technology Act and Section 38 of Aadhaar Act, 2016 and Sections 14C/14(C) of the Foreigners Act. And In the matter of : Bidhan Murmu ……Petitioner. Mr. Dhanay Banerjee Mr. Agniswar Chowdhury Mr. Pradipp Saren Mr. Anchan Duytta Ms. Saheli Hembram Mr. Mohidul Islam ......for the Petitioner. Mr. Kallok Mondal, Ld. PP Mr. Sayak Chakraborty Mr. Sayan Mukherjee Mr. Sreyash Kumar Singh ……for the State. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody for more than one year two months, till date charges have not been framed and there is no possibility of the trial being taken to its logical conclusion. As such, petitioner be released on bail. Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail. I have taken into account the merits of the case, the petitioner is a Central Government employee who rented his finger print for preparation of identification documents. The accusations 2 are serious considering the fact the petitioner is a Government employee and the alleged complicity in the offence. Having considered the nature of the offences for which charge-sheet has been submitted, I am of the opinion that prosecution should be granted an opportunity to adduce the vulnerable witnesses. Accordingly, I direct that within a period of six months let the vulnerable witnesses be completed by the prosecution. At this stage, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Petitioner will renew his prayer for bail after the aforesaid time period is over. Accordingly, CRM (M) 2010 of 2026 is dismissed. State would communicate this order to the learned trial Court in seisin of the case. 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.)