Disposed¶16

Prasanta Ghosh v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC16 Feb 2026CRM (SB)/141/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cancellation of bail; Section 439(2) CrPC read with Section 483(3) BNSS; interim bail granted 2021, confirmed 2024; overt acts jeopardising trial; application before jurisdictional Magistrate; police report on genuinity of allegations; ACJM Alipore, South 24 Parganas; charge-sheet submitted, case not yet transmitted to trial court; State of West Bengal; Tirthankar Ghosh, J.; application disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Cancellation application disposed of without immediate cancellation of bail; the jurisdictional Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail upon a future application arising from overt acts, after obtaining a police report on the genuineness of the allegations; an opportunity was granted to opposite party no.2. ¶16

Prasanta Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal and Anr. — Bail and Remand | Calcutta HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the interim bail of opposite party no.2 (confirmed in 2024) should be cancelled under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 483(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶4

Court's answer

Weighing the long-standing differences and disputes between the parties and the insecurity faced by the petitioner, the court did not cancel the bail straightaway but laid down that future overt acts creating circumstances jeopardising the trial are to be raised through an application before the jurisdictional Magistrate in seisin of the case.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

On receipt of such an application, the jurisdictional Magistrate is to call for a report from the police authorities regarding the genuineness of the allegations and thereafter is not to deter from cancelling the bail if the situation (printed as 'satiation') so demands.

¶14

Key takeaways

At this stage the court chose to grant an opportunity to opposite party no.2 rather than effect cancellation of the bail.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail-cancellation application (C.R.M. (SB) 141 of 2024) under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 483(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, moved by Prasanta Ghosh seeking cancellation of the interim bail of opposite party no.2 — bail granted in 2021, extended from time to time and confirmed in 2024. The underlying case pends before the learned ACJM, Alipore, South 24 Parganas; the charge-sheet has been filed but the papers have not yet reached the trial court. Tirthankar Ghosh, J., taking into account the long-standing differences between the parties and the insecurity faced by the petitioner, did not cancel the bail forthwith. He directed that if overt acts hereafter create circumstances jeopardising the trial, the petitioner may apply to the jurisdictional Magistrate in seisin of the case, who shall call for a police report on the genuineness of the allegations and 'will not deter from cancelling the bail' if the situation so demands; meanwhile an opportunity was afforded to opposite party no.2. The matter was disposed of on these terms.

Prasanta Ghosh v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasanta Ghosh v. 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

Similar cases

Nabab Sk Vs State of West Bengal

Minajul Mondal @ Mandal Vs State of West Bengal

Subal Sarkar Vs State of West Bengal

Babar Shah @ Babar Ali Shah Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Biplab Murmu Vs State of West Bengal

Jashimuddin Sarkar Vs State of West Bengal