Soumyadeep Naha v. the State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC16 Mar 2026CRR/93/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Soumyadeep Naha v. State of West Bengal; CRR 93 of 2026; Calcutta High Court, Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri; Jay Sengupta, J.; warrant of arrest; proclamation; attachment; stay of coercive orders for four weeks; surrender before jurisdictional Court; prayer for bail; interim bail confirmed; absence from Court on 10/12/2024 and 18/09/2024; revisional application disposed; 16/03/2026.

What did the court decide?

Stay of the orders issuing warrant of arrest, proclamation and attachment for a period of four weeks; liberty to the petitioner to surrender before the learned jurisdictional Court within four weeks and pray for bail, such application to be considered in accordance with law. ¶¶14

Soumyadeep Naha Vs the State of West Bengal — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

D/L – 45 16/03/2026 Court No.6 S.Kundu

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI

¶3

CRR 93 of 2026

¶4

Soumyadeep Naha Vs. State of West Bengal

¶5

Mr. Joydeep Kanta Bhowmik Mr. Sayantan Bhowmik Mr. Shubham Kumar Ms. Jasmin Hoque Ms. Priti Das Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty Mr. Nilay Chakraborty

¶6

…for the petitioner.

¶7

…for the State.

¶8

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was first granted interim bail and thereafter, the bail was confirmed. He regularly attended the Court for some time. On 10/12/2024 and 18/09/2024, the petitioner was absent from Court due to some exigent circumstances. A warrant and thereafter, proclamation and attachment were issued. The petitioner now wants to join the proceeding at the earliest.

¶9

A copy of this application is served upon the learned Additional Public Prosecutor in Court.

¶10

Heard the learned counsel for the State.

¶11

¶12

It appears that the petitioner was granted bail. He attended the Court for some time. According to him, due to some exigent circumstances, the petitioner could not attend the Court on two occasions and warrant of arrest was issued. Now, proclamation, attachment have also been issued against the petitioner.

¶13

Considering the above, the fact that the petitioner wants to join the proceeding at the earliest and in the interest of justice, let the orders issuing warrant of arrest, proclamation and attachment remain stayed for a period of four weeks from date. The petitioner shall be at liberty to surrender before the learned jurisdictional Court within four weeks from date and pray for bail and in such event, the application of the petitioner for bail shall be considered in accordance with law.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the revisional application is disposed of.

¶15

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

¶16

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

Soumyadeep Naha v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soumyadeep Naha v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Joydeep Das Gupta Vs State of West Bengal

Rinki Khatun and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal

Palash Majhi Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Ayub Ali@Aiup Haq and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal

Tarani Barman Vs the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Biswa @ Biswjit Barman Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.