Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Shital Roy @ Shital Kumar Roy @ Papan vs Unknown on 7 April, 2026
Author: Tirthankar Ghosh
Bench: Tirthankar Ghosh
07.04.2026
Court No.35.
D/L. 30.
Kausik
CRM (M) 270 of 2026
In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Raiganj Police
Station Case No. 844 of 2021 dated 28.09.2021 under sections
326/307/302/109/120B/212/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code
read with section 25(i)(a)/27/35 of Arms Act.
And
In the matter of : Shital Roy @ Shital Kumar Roy @ Papan
Roy
……Petitioner.
Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay
Ms. Sadia Parveen
……for the Petitioner.
Mr. Aninda Sundar Chatterjee
Mr. Amit Roy
Mr. Anish Tiwari
….for the Defacto Complainant.
Mr. Subhamoy Bhattacharya
Mr. Ratul Ghosh
……for the State.
Learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner
submits that within the prescribed period of 8 months the trial
could not be completed, as such the petitioner should be
released on bail as till date out of the cited 27 charge sheeted
witnesses only 20 witnesses could be examined by the
prosecution.
2
Learned advocate appearing for the State submits that
on the earlier occasion the learned two Magistrates who
recorded statements under section 164 of Cr.P.C. of the witness
appeared virtually because of other compulsions. However,
defence refused to cross-examine them virtually, as such time
was granted.
Having regard to the gravity of the offence as a matter of
last opportunity, prosecution is granted 3 more months time to
complete the evidence. In case, the evidence is not completed
by 30th July, 2026 petitioner be released on interim bail on
such terms and conditions as the learned Trial Court would
deem fit and proper for ensuring further appearance of the
accused before the learned Trial Court.
Needless to state that all efforts must be exerted by the
prosecution to complete the witnesses whom they intend to rely
within the aforesaid time schedule. If required, the learned
Trial Court would fix 3 schedule in a month and will not grant
unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. If required,
the Investigating Officer would ensure that the Alamats are
present before the Court when the witnesses are examined and
the trial of the case would continue in spite of any resolution of
the local bar.
With the aforesaid observations CRM (M) 270 of 2026 is
disposed of.
3
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.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)
