Disposed¶14

Nur Islam Sk. v. the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC6 Mar 2026CRM (DB)/1469/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Calcutta High Court; CRM (DB) 1469 of 2024; cancellation of bail; Section 439(2) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Sections 302/120B Indian Penal Code; Section 4 Explosive Substances Act; Tirthankar Ghosh, J.; perversity of bail order; threatening witnesses; tampering with evidence; stretching time in trial; stringent conditions; disposed of; bail not cancelled; CRM(DB) 1042 of 2024.

What did the court decide?

Bail of opposite party no. 2 was not cancelled; the application was disposed of with the observation that the learned Trial Court is at liberty to impose further stringent conditions, including cancelling the bail, if the accused violates conditions, threatens witnesses, tampers with evidence or delays the trial. ¶14

Nur Islam Sk. Vs the State of West Bengal and… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Calcutta HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the bail granted to opposite party no. 2 (the accused) by the Division Bench on 08.04.2024 in CRM(DB) 1042 of 2024 ought to be cancelled under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶5

Court's answer

On the plea of perversity, the Court declined to cancel the bail: the bail order of 08.04.2024 had perused the witnesses' statements and contained merits findings tilting in favour of the accused, and it is difficult for a court of similar jurisdiction to consider the perversity of an order of a court making a similar determination.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

The remaining ('other') issues raised in the cancellation application were not decided by this Court and were left to be canvassed before the jurisdictional court.

¶11

Key takeaways

Having regard to the gravity of the offence (Sections 302/120B IPC and Section 4 Explosive Substances Act), if opposite party no. 2 violates the bail conditions, threatens witnesses, tampers with evidence, or stretches the time in the course of trial, the learned Trial Court or the Court in seisin of the case may impose further stringent conditions, including cancelling the bail, without further reference to this Court.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Application under Section 439(2) CrPC for cancellation of bail granted to opposite party no. 2, an accused in a case under Sections 302/120B IPC and Section 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, by a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court on 08.04.2024 in CRM(DB) 1042 of 2024. Tirthankar Ghosh, J., observed that the bail order had considered the statements of witnesses and contained merits findings tilting in favour of the accused, and that it is difficult for a court of similar jurisdiction to consider the perversity of an order of a court presiding over a similar determination. The other issues were left to be canvassed before the jurisdictional court. The bail was not cancelled; instead, noting the gravity of the offence, the learned Trial Court or the Court in seisin was given liberty to impose further stringent conditions, including cancelling the bail without further reference to this Court, if the accused violated the conditions, threatened witnesses, tampered with evidence, or stretched the time in course of trial. The application (earlier dismissed for default on 12.03.2025 and restored on 12.06.2025) was disposed of; none appeared for the petitioner on the day of hearing.

¶1

06.03.2026 Item No. M/L. 29 Ct.No.35 dc.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION

¶3

C.R.M. (DB) 1469 of 2024

¶4

The State of West Bengal & Anr.

¶5

In Re : An Application for cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶6

Ms. Anasuya Sinha, APP, Ms. Madhumita Basak … For the State.

¶7

The application for cancellation of bail was earlier dismissed for default on 12.03.2025. Thereafter on an application preferred by the petitioner, the same was restored on 12.06.2025. Today, when the application has been called, none appears on behalf of the petitioner.

¶8

Learned advocate for the State is present.

¶9

Petitioner has prayed for cancellation of the order granting bail to the opposite party no.2 herein by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court on 08.04.2024 in CRM(DB) 1042 of 2024. The order itself reflects that while granting bail, the Court had the occasion to peruse and consider the statement of the witnesses and there were findings prior to the bail being granted. Such findings were on merits of the case which tilted in favour of the accused/opposite party no.2 herein. As such, it is difficult for a Court on similar jurisdiction to consider the perversity of any order of a Court presiding over similar determination.

¶10

¶11

So far as the other issues are concerned, I am of the opinion that the same should be canvassed before the jurisdictional court.

¶12

Needless to state that the case is under Sections 302/120B of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 of the Explosive Substances Act.

¶13

Having regard to the gravity of the offence, I direct that in case the opposite party no.2 herein who was implicated as an accused in the case violates the conditions or creates any impediment in the progress of the case particularly with regard to threatening of the witnesses concerned or tampering with any other evidence of the case or stretching the time in course of the trial, in such circumstances, the learned Trial Court or the Court in seisin of the case would be at liberty to impose further stringent conditions including cancelling the bail without further reference to this Court.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, the application for cancellation of bail being CRM (DB) 1469 of 2024 is disposed of.

¶15

All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶16

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

¶17

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

Nur Islam Sk. v. the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nur Islam Sk. v. the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sabiruddin Sk Vs State of West Bengal

Rabiul Sk Vs State of West Bengal

Anu Kumar Goel Vs State of West Bengal

Pradip Mondal Vs State of West Bengal

Maya Mondal Vs State of West Bengal

Samir Mondal Vs the State of West Bengal