14 07.08.2026 (ct. no.34) sg CRM (M) 819 of 2026 Parmar Vijaysinh-Chattarsinh @ Parimal Vijaysinh Chatarsingh Vs. State of West Bengal In re: An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with G.R. Case No. 1444 of 2025 corresponding to Kanksa Police Station Case No. 286 dated 23.9.2025 under Sections 126(2)/319(2)/310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. - A n d - Mr. Joy Chakraborty Mr. Kunal Ganguly Mr. Sandip Dinda Mr. S. Ganguly …For the petitioner in CRM (M) 819 of 2026. Mr. Kallol Mondal Mr. Bhaskar Seth Mr. Neel Chakraborty …For the State in CRM(M) 819 of 2026. Re. : CRM(M) 819 of 2026 1. This is the case of the present petitioner who is in custody on and from October 07, 2025, that is, for a period of ten months. He was not identified in the T.I. Parade and no recovery is made from him. 2. Learned advocate representing the petitioner submits that present petitioner is in custody for more than ten months. No direct recovery was made from him. During period of detention, recovery of Rs. 26,000/- (Rs. Twenty Six Thousand), a mobile phone and Aadhaar Card were recovered from his house. The petitioner is 2 a businessman and is standing on a better footing than the principal co-accused from whom huge amount was recovered and are now released on bail. He has been falsely implicated in this case having no nexus with the present persons.

3. It is further submitted that the cancellation of bail granted in favour of those other co-accused are still pending and the prosecution has filed petition for transfer of the entire proceeding from the said court and hence there is remote possibility of commencement of trial. Hence prayed for bail. 4. Learned prosecution, on the other hand, raised strong objection. It is his specific contention that against the order granting bail in favour of three co-accused, State has filed application for cancellation of such bail and those are still pending. The allegation is serious in nature and granting of bail would frustrate the trial. The prosecution further submitted that this petitioner was one of the mastermind of the entire acts, 5. Having heard the submissions and on going through the materials on record it appears that the instant complaint was initiated on the basis of a written complaint lodged against some unidentified persons who intercepted the vehicle which was carrying huge amount of money. 3 6. Taking case of the present petitioner independently, it would appear that petitioner is in custody for 10 months and no direct recovery was made from him. Investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has been submitted in this case. No prior criminal antecedents are found from the Memo of evidence filed by the Prosecution .

7. In view of the pending proceedings where the prayer for transfer of entire proceeding from the court of Learned ACJM–in charge filed by the prosecution there is remote possibility of any trial to be commenced at the earliest. 8. Therefore, in view of the above facts and circumstances as the out of 11 accused persons 8 accused persons are granted bail ,and the cancellation of bail application of the persons still pending and the period of detention coupled with the fact that the trial has not yet commenced though the investigation is completed ,this Court is inclined to allow the prayer of bail of the present petitioner. 9. Accordingly, petitioner will be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Thirty Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Durgapur subject to adhering the following conditions ; 4 i)The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the local Police Station, Kanksa without the permission of the concerned Court. ii) Petitioner shall furnish address of his present address to the concerned Officer-in-charge of the police station and will appear before the O.C, Kanksa Police Station once in a week.

iii) He shall not intimidate or threaten the witnesses or try to tamper any evidence in any manner whatsoever and shall not commit any cognizable offence in any manner whatsoever. iv))The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date until further order. 10. In the event the petitioner fails to adhere to any of the conditions stipulated above the court will be at liberty to take appropriate steps for cancellation of the bail without further reference of this Court. 11. The application for bail being CRM (M) 819 of 2026 is, thus, allowed. 12. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. [Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)] 5

14 07.08.2026 (ct. no.34) sg CRM (M) 819 of 2026 Parmar Vijaysinh-Chattarsinh @ Parimal Vijaysinh Chatarsingh Vs. State of West Bengal In re: An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with G.R. Case No. 1444 of 2025 corresponding to Kanksa Police Station Case No. 286 dated 23.9.2025 under Sections 126(2)/319(2)/310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. - A n d - Mr. Joy Chakraborty Mr. Kunal Ganguly Mr. Sandip Dinda Mr. S. Ganguly …For the petitioner in CRM (M) 819 of 2026. Mr. Kallol Mondal Mr. Bhaskar Seth Mr. Neel Chakraborty …For the State in CRM(M) 819 of 2026. Re. : CRM(M) 819 of 2026 1. This is the case of the present petitioner who is in custody on and from October 07, 2025, that is, for a period of ten months. He was not identified in the T.I. Parade and no recovery is made from him. 2. Learned advocate representing the petitioner submits that present petitioner is in custody for more than ten months. No direct recovery was made from him. During period of detention, recovery of Rs. 26,000/- (Rs. Twenty Six Thousand), a mobile phone and Aadhaar Card were recovered from his house. The petitioner is 2 a businessman and is standing on a better footing than the principal co-accused from whom huge amount was recovered and are now released on bail. He has been falsely implicated in this case having no nexus with the present persons.

3. It is further submitted that the cancellation of bail granted in favour of those other co-accused are still pending and the prosecution has filed petition for transfer of the entire proceeding from the said court and hence there is remote possibility of commencement of trial. Hence prayed for bail. 4. Learned prosecution, on the other hand, raised strong objection. It is his specific contention that against the order granting bail in favour of three co-accused, State has filed application for cancellation of such bail and those are still pending. The allegation is serious in nature and granting of bail would frustrate the trial. The prosecution further submitted that this petitioner was one of the mastermind of the entire acts, 5. Having heard the submissions and on going through the materials on record it appears that the instant complaint was initiated on the basis of a written complaint lodged against some unidentified persons who intercepted the vehicle which was carrying huge amount of money. 3 6. Taking case of the present petitioner independently, it would appear that petitioner is in custody for 10 months and no direct recovery was made from him. Investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has been submitted in this case. No prior criminal antecedents are found from the Memo of evidence filed by the Prosecution .

7. In view of the pending proceedings where the prayer for transfer of entire proceeding from the court of Learned ACJM–in charge filed by the prosecution there is remote possibility of any trial to be commenced at the earliest. 8. Therefore, in view of the above facts and circumstances as the out of 11 accused persons 8 accused persons are granted bail ,and the cancellation of bail application of the persons still pending and the period of detention coupled with the fact that the trial has not yet commenced though the investigation is completed ,this Court is inclined to allow the prayer of bail of the present petitioner. 9. Accordingly, petitioner will be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Thirty Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Durgapur subject to adhering the following conditions ; 4 i)The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the local Police Station, Kanksa without the permission of the concerned Court. ii) Petitioner shall furnish address of his present address to the concerned Officer-in-charge of the police station and will appear before the O.C, Kanksa Police Station once in a week.

iii) He shall not intimidate or threaten the witnesses or try to tamper any evidence in any manner whatsoever and shall not commit any cognizable offence in any manner whatsoever. iv))The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date until further order. 10. In the event the petitioner fails to adhere to any of the conditions stipulated above the court will be at liberty to take appropriate steps for cancellation of the bail without further reference of this Court. 11. The application for bail being CRM (M) 819 of 2026 is, thus, allowed. 12. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. [Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)] 5