12.03.2026 Court No.237. D/L.33. Kausik (Allowed) CRM (M) 382 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Narkeldanga Police Station Case No. 302 of 2024 dated 02.11.2024 under section 189(2)/189(3)/191(2)/191(3)/195(1)/132/121(1)/121(2)/324(5)/ 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 read with Section 10 of The West Bengal Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1972. And In the matter of :Surender @ Surinder Pal Singh @ Boogie @ Guggi. ……Petitioner. Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Sr. Adv. Mr. SoubhikMitter Mr. Joy Chakraborty Mr. SurojitSaha Mr. Sandip Dinda ……for the Petitioner. Mr. Debasish Roy, Ld. PP. Mr. Madhusudan Sur, Ld. APP. Mr. Anindya Sundar Chatterjee Mr. BaisaliBasu, Ld. Jr. Govt. Adv. Mr. Md. Kutubuddin ……for the State. The petitioner’s prayer for bail was last rejected on 29.04.2025. In the interregnum, the charge sheet has been filed and the petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail by way of the present application. It appears that the petitioner has been in custody for more than one year. The only allegation which may entail a 2 Sessionstrial pertains to Section 121(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It further appears that as many as four FIRs were registered against the petitioner in connection with an incident alleged to have taken place on 01.11.2024. It is not disputed by the State that the petitioner has been granted bail in connection with Narkeldanga Police Station Case No. 299 of 2024 dated 02.11.2024 under Sections 127(1)/115(2)/118(1)/3(5) of the BNS and Narkeldanga Police Station Case No. 300 of 2024 dated 02.11.2024 under Sections 109(1)/3(5) of the BNS. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. It is submitted that the petitioner has a criminal antecedent. It has also been contended that the complicity of the petitioner is apparent from the FSL report concerning the relevant CCTV footage. Learned counsel, relying upon orders passed in CRM (M) 999 of 2025 and CRM (M) 1000 of 2025 dated August 5, 2025 by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, submits that there are no compelling circumstances warranting the grant of bail to the petitioner in the present application. This Court is of the prima facie view that four separate FIRs could not have been registered in respect of the selfsame incident in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court 3 passed in (2001) 6 SCC 181 (T.T. Antony vs. State of Kerala &Ors.). However, the existence of multiple FIRs cannot be the sole consideration for granting bail to the petitioner. Having regard to the fact that the investigation is complete and that the only offence triable by the Court of Sessions involved in the present case appears to be under Section 121(2) of the BNS, 2023, this Court is of the view that further detention of the petitioner in custody is not necessary. Accordingly, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only), along with two sureties of the like amount each, one of whom must be a local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1stCourt, Sealdah, South 24 Parganas. It is further directed that the petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on every date of hearing until further orders and shall not intimidate any witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner. Additionally, the petitioner shall not enter the jurisdiction of learned ACJM, Sealdah except for attending the trial until further orders. Failure on the part of the petitioner to comply with the aforesaid conditions shall entitle the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to the petitioner in accordance with law, without any further reference to this Court. 4 Accordingly, CRM (M) 382 of 2026 stands allowed. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the Trial Court for relaxation of the bail conditions, and the Trial Court shall consider such prayer in accordance with law regardless of the conditions imposed in this order. 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. (Kausik Chanda, J.)