21.04.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.86 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected C.R.M. (M) 2633 of 2025 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with English Bazar Police Station Case No. 1481 of 2025 dated 11.07.2025 under Sections 332(a)/115(2)/118(1)/109/103(1)/74/111(2)(a)/238(a)/3(5)/ 61(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. And In Re : Mainul Sk @ Mainul Sekh ... Petitioner. Mr. Milon Mukherjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Avinaba Patra, Mr. Mazahar Hossain Chowdhury, Mr. Dipayan Kundu ... For the Petitioner. Mr. Debasish Roy, Ld. PP, Ms. Sreyashee Biswas, Ms. Jonaki Saha ... For the State. Ms. Sanjukta Samanta, Mr. Romit Dutta ... For the de facto complainant. Learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 12.07.2025; charges have already been framed and witness action is about to commence. There are issues which have been canvassed relating to the initial arrest and non-production within the statutory period which are the subject-matter of the revisional application. Prosecution has relied upon 27 witnesses. As such, petitioner prays for bail as there is no possibility of the trial concluding within a specific period. Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there are five eyewitnesses 2 to the incident. There are antecedents of the present petitioner and there are overwhelming materials which are required to be presented before the Trial Court. Learned advocate appearing for the de facto complainant also opposes the prayer for bail and submits that during the pendency of the present case, another criminal case has been registered. Having regard to the materials appearing in the case diary and the stage of the case, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail till the evidence of five witnesses, emphasised on behalf of the prosecution, is over. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Petitioner will renew his prayer for bail after the evidence of such witnesses is over. The application for bail, being CRM (M) 2633 of 2025, 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. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)