Umesh Thakur vs Unknown on 16 February, 2026

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Umesh Thakur vs Unknown on 16 February, 2026

Author: Arijit Banerjee

Bench: Arijit Banerjee

16.02.2026

Sl. No. DL 43
                              In the High Court at Calcutta
Court No. 08                            Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction
Asraf, A.R.(Ct.)                                Appellate Side
                   Case No.
                                             CRA 218 of 2021
                                                  with
                                             CRAN 3 of 2024

                   In Re : An application under Section 389 of the Code of
                           Criminal Procedure, 1973 arising out of Nalhati PS case
                           no.244 of 2014 dated 08.10.2014 under Sections 363,
                           364(A), 366(A), , , 376(2)(i),  and 376(A) of the
                           Indian Penal Code read with Section 6 of the Protection
                           of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
                                                    -AND-
                   In the matter of :
                                              UMESH THAKUR
                                                                          ......Appellant
                   For the Appellant :
                                    Mr. Joy Chakraborty
                                    Mr. Sandip Dinda
                                                                    ...Advocates
                   For the Respondent / State :
                                   Mr. Rudradipta Nandy, APP
                                   Ms. Nandini Chatterjee
                                                            ...Advocates
                   Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J. :

In Re : I. A. CRAN 3 of 2024

1. The appellant was convicted under Section 6 of the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and

sentenced to suffer life imprisonment. He now prays for

suspension of sentence.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the State has filed service

report. From the report it appears that the survivor girl or

her family members could not be found at the recorded

address. The concerned municipality has also issued a

certificate to the effect that the family of the survivor girl
Page 2

does not reside at the recorded address anymore. The

police has been unable to effect service on the survivor girl.

3. The appellant says that he is in custody for about 11 years 4

months. His appeal of 2021 has not yet been heard. There is

no certainty as to when the appeal will be heard. On the

touchstone of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, he

prays for suspension of sentence pending disposal of the

appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for

suspension of sentence. She says that there is sufficient

incriminating evidence against the appellant including the

evidence of the survivor girl being PW 2. It is a heinous

crime. No leniency should be shown to the appellant.

5. We are presently not on the merits of the case. We see that

the appellant is in custody for about 11 years 4 months. The

custody certificate filed by the State today corroborates

this. We cannot also say with any degree of certainty as to

when the appeal of the appellant will be heard. Appeals

filed much prior in point of time are yet to be heard.

6. Accordingly, without touching the merits of the case and

solely on the ground of very long detention of the appellant

coupled with the uncertainty of an early hearing of his

appeal, we feel constrained to allow this application.

7. Accordingly, we direct that the applicant / appellant,

namely, Umesh Thakur, shall be released on bail upon

furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/-, with two sureties of like

amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction

of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Suri, Birbhum, and
Page 3

on further conditions that he shall not leave the municipal

limits of Kolkata and on further condition that he shall meet

the concerned Inspector-in-Charge of the address where he

shall reside within the municipal limits of Kolkata once a

fortnight and further that the appellant shall be personally

present or be represented before this Court when the appeal

is taken up for hearing.

8. The operation of the order of conviction and sentence shall

remain suspended till disposal of the appeal or until further

orders, whichever is earlier. We also stay the operation of

the payment of fine, if any, till disposal of the appeal.

9. The department is directed to forward a copy of this order

to the Superintendent of the concerned Correctional Home

for immediate release of the applicant / appellant unless he

is wanted in connection with any other case.

10. We clarify that the observations made by us in this order

are only for the purpose of disposing of the application for

suspension of sentence and the same shall have no

relevance at the final hearing of the appeal.

11. The application being I. A. No. CRAN 3 of 2024 is, thus,

disposed of.

12. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied

for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all necessary

formalities.

( Arijit Banerjee, J. )

( Partha Sarathi Sen, J. )