Maruf Mallick @ Maruf Sheikh Vs State of West Bengal — Bail and Remand | Calcutta HC (2026)

Maruf Mallick @ Maruf Sheikh Vs State of West Bengal — Bail and Remand | Calcutta HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release on bail: petitioner Maruf Mallick @ Mafuf Sheikh to furnish bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 10,000/- each (one of whom must be local), to the satisfaction of the Learned ACJM, Basirhat; conditional on physical presence before the learned Trial Court on each and every fixed date, not leaving the jurisdiction of District 24 Parganas North without prior permission of the learned Trial Court, furnishing his post-release address, and liberty to police authorities for surprise checks regarding his availability.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner — in custody since his arrest in October 2024 (more than 1 year and 8 months), with the charge sheet submitted but no progress of trial, for charges carrying a prescribed punishment of a fixed term — should be released on bail under Section 483 BNSS 2023 / Section 439 CrPC 1973 despite the State's opposition.

Court's answer

Having considered that the petitioner is facing trial for charges wherein the prescribed punishment is for a fixed term, the presiding Judge was inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

Ratio / Principle

Considering the period of detention already undergone, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was allowed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 / Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Swarupnagar Police Station Case No. 615 of 2024 dated 15.10.2024 (Sections 14A(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 read with section 12 of the Passport Act, 1967): petitioner in custody since October 2024, over 1 year and 8 months having passed, charge sheet submitted but no progress of trial, prescribed punishment for the charges being a fixed term — single-judge Bench allowed the prayer for bail on bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 10,000/- each (one local), to the satisfaction of the Learned ACJM, Basirhat, subject to conditions: attendance before the Trial Court on every fixed date, no departure from District 24 Parganas North without prior permission, furnishing of residential address before release, and liberty to police for surprise checks. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.; decided 02.07.2026)

02.07.2026 Court No.35. D/L. 243. Kausik (Allowed)

CRM (M) 1034 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 Swarupnagar Police Station Case No. 615 of 2024 dated 15.10.2024 under Sections 14A(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and read with section 12 of the Passport Act, 1967.

And

In the matter of : Maruf Mallick @ Mafuf Sheikh

……Petitioner.

Mr. Ali Ahsan Alamgir Ms. Soma Mal Ms. June Modak

……for the Petitioner.

Mrs. Ananya Chakraborty

……for the State.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits

that petitioner was arrested on October, 2024 and since then

he is in custody. More than 1 year and 8 months have passed. Charge sheet has been submitted. However, there has been no progress of the trial of the case.

Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for

bail.

Having considered that petitioner is facing trial for charges wherein the prescribed punishment is for a fixed term, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Considering the period of detention, prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed.

2

Accordingly, Petitioner, namely, Maruf Mallick @ Mafuf Sheikh shall furnish bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties of Rs. 10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each, one of whom must be local to the satisfaction of Learned ACJM, Basirhat.

If on bail, the petitioner shall be physically present on each and every date fixed before the learned Trial Court and shall not leave the jurisdiction of District of 24 Parganas North without the prior permission of the learned Trial Court.

Additionally, petitioner would furnish his address where he would be staying before his release. The police authorities would be at liberty to give surprise check for assessing regarding the availability of the petitioner.

With the aforesaid observations CRM (M) 1034 of 2026

is allowed .

Memo of Evidence submitted be kept with the record.

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.)