Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Penal Code vs In Re : Meyerana Khatun Alias Taniya @ ... on 16 December, 2025
Author: Tirthankar Ghosh
Bench: Tirthankar Ghosh
16.12.2025 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.31 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc.
Rejected C.R.M. (M) 2535 of 2025 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed in connection with Dholahat Police Station Case No. 46 of 2023 dated 30.01.2023 under Sections 363/365 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and charge-sheet submitted under Sections 363/365/366A/370/370A/372/373/120B of the Indian Penal Code.
And In Re : Meyerana Khatun alias Taniya @ Meherana Khatun ... Petitioner.
Mr. Akash Dutta, Mr. Aditya Dutta ... For the Petitioner.
Mr. Iqbal Kabir, Mr. Sobhan Gani ... For the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 07.02.2023 and there is no scope for the trial concluding in near future. As such, learned advocate has prayed for bail of the petitioner on any stringent condition.
Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that prosecution was progressing with seven witnesses having been completed. Thereafter the accused persons filed application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for which the witnesses were supposed to be recalled. The de facto complainant again challenged the 2 order in a revisional application being CRR 1282 of 2025. There has been stay of the proceedings and the judgement is to be delivered by a co-ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court.
State intends to examine eight more witnesses. Having considered that the present circumstances are beyond the control of the State, I direct that after the revisional application is over, the State would put in efforts to complete the examination of all the eight witnesses at the earliest.
At this stage, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.
The Investigating Officer of the case is present in Court. His further appearance before this Court is dispensed with.
Report submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record.
The application for bail, being CRM (M) 2535 of 2025, is, thus, disposed of.
All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly 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.)