16. 14.10.2026. Court No.33. (Pritam) (Allowed) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CRM (M) 2211 of 2026. In Re: An application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kaliganj Police Station Case No.534/2025 dated 23.06.2025 under Sections 103/109/118(2)/190/191(2)/191(3)/305 of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 3/4 of the Explosive Act, 1908. In the matter of: - SAHIBUL SK. @ SAHIBUL SEKH. ..…petitioner. Mr. Sagar Saha, Ms. Nayana Mukhopadhyay, Mr. Manjeet Saha, Mr. Subhrojyoti Das. ..…for the petitioner. Mr. Kollol Mondal, Ld. PP., Mr. Gurudas Mitra, Mr. Utsav Dutta. ..…for the State. 1. The learned advocate representing the petitioner referred to the observations of the Investigating Officer in final report dated 27th October, 2025. The operative portion of the aforesaid report is as follows; “.........The accused persons – (11) Sabirul Sk @ Sabir Sk s/o Patal Sk; (12) Rajabul Sk. @ Raja Sk S/o Ismail Sk @ Fakar Sk and (13) Ismail Sk @ Fakar Sk S/o Lt Maynuddin Sk; all of Vill Molandi PS Kaliganj Dist Nadia are still absconding to provide Police arrest. Hence, I pray that W/A may kindly be issued against them. I would further like to note here that in course of investigation no positive clue could have been collected under the FIR named alleged – Sahibul Sk @ Sahibul Sekh s/o Gaoyal @ Gaowal Sk of 2 Molandi PS Kaliganj Dist Nadia. Hence, I pray that he may kindly be discharged from this case. I pray before Ld. Court that the witnesses noted in col. No-16 may kindly be summoned who will prove the case during trail. The result of this case has been informed to the complainant......”. 2. Vide order No.6 dated 29th November, 2025, the court of ADJ 3rd Court, Krishnagar, Nadia in SC Case No.634(9)2025 (R-634 of 2025), had allowed the prayer of the Investigating Office for discharge of the accused, namely, Sahibul Sk. @ Sahibul Sekh. 3. The learned advocate representing the petitioner submitted the aforesaid order passed by the trial court had not been challenged on behalf of the State after a lapse of six months. The present petitioner had been arrested and is languishing in custody for more than 3 months and 17 days and seeks for prayer of bail. 4. The learned advocate representing the State opposed the prayer for grant of bail on account of revelation of the present petitioner’s name from the statement of a co-accused namely, Nabab Sk., who had been arrested on 27th June, 2025, describing the role of the present petitioner to have been pivotal and to have orchestrated the entire episode of bomb blast in connection with the bye-election. Subsequently, by filing a charge-sheet dated 3rd August, 2026, petitioner had been cited as an accused. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the inconclusive statement of involvement as per the CDR and 3 SDR pointed out by the learned advocate representing the State, the prayer for bail is considered and allowed. 6. Accordingly, the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Krishnagar, Nadia, on condition that the petitioner shall appear before the trial court on every date of hearing and shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever and on further condition the petitioner shall meet the jurisdictional police station thrice a week, until further orders. The petitioner shall also not leave the jurisdiction of the trial court without prior permission. 7. In the event he fails to appear before the trial court without justifiable cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail automatically without reference to this court. 8. The application being CRM(M) No. 2211 of 2026 is allowed and disposed of. 9. The trial court is directed to ensure the presence of the doctors passing stringent directions if required to take the assistance of the concerned police station to serve notice upon the doctors through the health department. 10. (Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.)