Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Fidel Singha Vs State of West Bengal — Domestic Violence | Calcutta HC (2026)

Home
Calcutta HC
2026
Fidel Singha Vs State of West BengalFidel Singha v. State of West Bengal

Disposed¶17

Fidel Singha v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC13 Jul 2026CRA (SB)/59/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Calcutta High Court, Tirthankar Ghosh J., decided 13.07.2026 — CRA (SB) 59 of 2026 with CRAN 2 of 2025, In the matter of Fidel Singha. Appeal under S.374(2) CrPC / S.415(2) BNSS against conviction under S.304(II) IPC (six years and Rs. 10,000/- fine with default clause) by the Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Malda in Sessions Trial No. 07 of 2021 (Sessions Case No. 181 of 2020), arising out of Gazole PS Case No. 355 of 2020 dated 10.08.2020 under S.498A/302/34 IPC read with S.3/4 DP Act. Trial court had acquitted the appellant under S.498A/302 and the D.V. Act (sic. DP Act). Appellant in custody since 11.08.2020, having served five years eleven months. Conviction affirmed; sentence reduced to period already undergone; direction for release forthwith if not wanted in any other case; appeal disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Conviction affirmed; sentence reduced to the period already undergone; appellant Fidel Singha to be released forthwith by the jail authorities if not wanted in any other case; copy of the order to be sent to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Malda for prompt action.

Why is it important?

Further pendency of the appeal is unwarranted as the appellant has already served out five years eleven months of the six-year sentence. ¶14

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Conviction affirmed; sentence reduced to the period already undergone; appellant Fidel Singha to be released forthwith by the jail authorities if not wanted in any other case; copy of the order to be sent to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Malda for prompt action.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appeal under Section 374(2) CrPC (corresponding to Section 415(2) BNSS 2023) against the conviction and six-year sentence under Section 304(II) IPC warranted further adjudication, given that the appellant had already served five years eleven months in custody since 11.08.2020.

Court's answer

Further pendency of the appeal is unwarranted as the appellant has already served out five years eleven months of the six-year sentence.

Ratio / Principle

The judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned trial court under Section 304(II) IPC is affirmed.

Key takeaways

The sentence imposed by the learned trial court is reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant.ratio¶15
If the appellant Fidel Singha is not wanted in any other case, he may be released forthwith by the jail authorities.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal appeal u/s 374(2) CrPC (corresponding to S.415(2) BNSS 2023) against conviction under S.304(II) IPC — appellant in custody since 11.08.2020, having served five years eleven months of the six-year sentence with Rs. 10,000/- fine imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Malda in ST No. 07 of 2021 arising out of Gazole PS Case No. 355 of 2020 (Ss.498A/302/34 IPC read with S.3/4 DP Act, sic. D.V. Act) — trial court had acquitted the appellant of the charges under S.498A/302 IPC and S.3/4 of the D.V. Act — Held: judgment and order of conviction affirmed, but sentence reduced to the period already undergone; appellant (Fidel Singha) to be released forthwith if not wanted in any other case — appeal disposed of. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

A

13.07.2026 Serial no. 47 [G.S.D]

CRA (SB) 59 of 2026 +

CRAN 2 of 2025

In re : An application for Appeal u/s 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, corresponding to 415(2) of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with ST No. 07/21 arising out of Gazole PS Case No. 355 of 2020 dated 10.08.2020 u/s 498A/302/34 of the IPC read with section 3/4 of the DP Act.

-And-

In the matter of : Fidel Singha

Dr. Achin Jana Ms. Chetna Rustagi Ms. Arushi Rathore

… Appellant(s) … for the Appellant(s) … for the State-respondent(s)

Learned advocate for the appellant/petitioner has drawn the attention of the court to the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1^st Court, Malda in connection with Sessions Trial No. 07 of 2021 (arising out of Sessions Case No. 181 of 2020).

The records of the case speak that the appellant is in custody since 11^th August, 2020 and the prescribed punishment imposed by the learned trial court being the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1^st Court, Malda is for a period of six years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offence under section 304(II) of the IPC.

The present case was registered for the investigation as Gazole PS Case No. 355 of 2020 dated 10.08.2020 under

2

sections 498A/302/34 of the IPC and Sections 3&4 of the D.V. Act ( sic. DP Act ). After assessing the evidence, the learned trial court was pleased to acquit the appellant from the charges under Section 498A/302 and Section 3/4 of the D.V. Act ( sic. DP Act ).

Having considered that the appellant/petitioner was convicted and sentenced under Section 304(II) of the IPC for a period of six years and additional fine of Rs.10,000/with a default sentence clause being imposed and the fact that appellant/petitioner has already served out five years eleven months, I am of the opinion that further pendency of the present Appeal is unwarranted.

Accordingly, the judgement and order of conviction is affirmed. However, the sentence imposed by the learned trial court is reduced to the period already undergone by the present appellant.

Accordingly, if the appellant [Fidel Singha] is not wanted in any other case, he may be released forthwith by the jail authorities.

With the aforesaid observations, CRA (SB) 59 of 2026 along with CRAN 2 of 2025 is disposed of.

A copy of the order be sent to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1^st Court, Malda for necessary and prompt action.

3

The learned Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta will take steps for immediate information to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1^st Court, Malda so that the appellant is released as directed above.

Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the appeal under Section 374(2) CrPC (corresponding to Section 415(2) BNSS 2023) against the conviction and six-year sentence under Section 304(II) IPC warranted further adjudication, given that the appellant had already served five years eleven months in custody since 11.08.2020.medium confidence¶14
The court held
Further pendency of the appeal is unwarranted as the appellant has already served out five years eleven months of the six-year sentence.ratio¶14

Statutes considered

7 provisions across 5 enactments

AI extract

Code of Criminal Procedure374(2)¶4
BNSS, 2023415(2)¶4
IPC498A/302/34¶4 304(II)¶10 498A/302¶13
DP Act3/4¶4
D.V. Act3&4¶13

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order of conviction and sentence under Section 304(II) IPC — six years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- with a default sentence clause — passed in Sessions Trial No. 07 of 2021 (arising out of Sessions Case No. 181 of 2020).¶9
Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Malda
Prior proceeding
Case registered as Gazole PS Case No. 355 of 2020 dated 10.08.2020 under Sections 498A/302/34 IPC read with Section 3/4 of the DP Act (the judgment notes 'D.V. Act (sic. DP Act)').¶4
Prior proceeding
Appellant in custody since 11 August 2020; trial court imposed a six-year sentence and fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offence under Section 304(II) IPC.¶10
Prior proceeding
Learned trial court acquitted the appellant of the charges under Section 498A/302 IPC and Section 3/4 of the D.V. Act (sic. DP Act) after assessing the evidence.¶13

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
Fidel Singha¶6
Dr. Achin Jana, Ms. Chetna Rustagi
respondent
State-respondent(s)¶8
Ms. Arushi Rathore

Coram

AI extract

Tirthankar Ghoshauthor¶23

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Calcutta HC
Decided on: 13 Jul 2026 · July
Registered: 2 Aug 2024
Case no.: CRA (SB)/59/2026
CNR: WBCHCA0386962024
Topic: Domestic Violence
Bench: Tirthankar Ghosh
Disposal: DISPOSED
Case type: CRA (SB)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Tirthankar Ghosh

Sainoor @ Sahnoor Mondal Vs State of West Bengal
10 Jul 2026
Firoj Sekh Vs State of West Bengal
10 Jul 2026
Aman Sk Vs State of West Bengal
10 Jul 2026
Raj Kumar Sarkar Vs State of West Bengal
13 Jul 2026
Faruk Sardar Vs State of West Bengal
13 Jul 2026
Abdul Jalil Seikh @ MD Abdul Jalil Seikh Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.
13 Jul 2026

Cite this judgement

Fidel Singha v. State of West Bengal, CRA (SB)/59/2026 (CAL), decided on 13 July 2026.

The Calcutta High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes7

Code of Criminal Procedure374(2)
BNSS, 2023415(2)
IPC498A/302/34 · 304(II) · 498A/302
DP Act3/4

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Order of conviction and sentence under Section 304(II) IPC — six years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- with a default sentence clause — passed in Sessions Trial No. 07 of 2021 (arising out of Sessions Case No. 181 of 2020).Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Malda
Case registered as Gazole PS Case No. 355 of 2020 dated 10.08.2020 under Sections 498A/302/34 IPC read with Section 3/4 of the DP Act (the judgment notes 'D.V. Act (sic. DP Act)').
Appellant in custody since 11 August 2020; trial court imposed a six-year sentence and fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offence under Section 304(II) IPC.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Tirthankar Ghosh

Parties & counsel