09.10.2026 Sl. No. 9 Court No.550 Rohan (Allowed) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M.(M) 2364 of 2026 In Re: An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Amta Police Station Case No. 35 of 2025 dated 09.03.2025 under Sections 103/238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. -And- In the matter of: Arijit Bonu …Petitioner Mr. Sk. Toslim Ali …for the Petitioner Mr. Brajesh Jha, APP Mr. Aditya Ratan Tiwary Mr. Neel Chakraborty … for the State 1. Report submitted by the learned counsel for the State be kept with the record. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is a case of circumstantial evidence. Nobody saw the petitioner to commit the crime. The petitioner is in custody for about 1 year 7 months. Charge was framed in the month of November, 2025 but only one witness is examined but in-part. There is no chance of an early conclusion of the trial and the petitioner may be enlarged on bail on any condition. 3. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail. According to him, there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the statement of the two vital witnesses recorded under Section 2 164 of Cr.P.C., who stated that the petitioner was seen by them at the dead of the night who came to their house and wanted to see the CCTV camera recording. During that period, the petitioner disclosed to them that there was a murder in the vicinity. Learned counsel for the State has also pointed out that the cycle of the victim was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. 4. I have gone through the materials on record. It appears that charge was framed in the month of November, 2025 and since then, only one witness was examined, that too in-part. Charge- sheet was filed in the month of June, 2025. The petitioner is in custody for about 1 year 7 months. There is no chance of an early conclusion of the trial since there are 18 charge-sheet witnesses. 5. In view of the above, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail on certain stringent conditions. 6. Accordingly, the application for bail of the petitioner, namely, Arijit Bonu is allowed. 7. I direct the petitioner will be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be a local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amta, Howrah. The petitioner shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every day of substantive hearing subject to the provisions of Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Section 355 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and shall not intimidate the witnesses and/or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever. The petitioner shall remain within the geographical limit of the district of Howrah but shall 3 not enter the jurisdiction of Amta Police Station and Jaipur Police Station and shall inform his address to the learned Trial Court where he would be residing and shall meet the Inspector-in- Charge of the local Jurisdictional Police Station once in a week until further order of the learned Trial Court. 8. In the event, the petitioner fails to comply with any of the conditions as stated above, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court. 9. Thus, the application for bail being C.R.M. (M) 2364 of 2026 stands disposed of. 10. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Hon’ble Court. 11. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)