AKASH NAYEK SHASHANKA SHEKHAR SAHA vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL — CRM(M)/1340/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 16th June 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA0239102026
Filing Number
CRM(M)/1335/2026
Filing Date
26-May-2026
Registration No
CRM(M)/1340/2026
Registration Date
26-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh
Coram
Hon'ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
GROUP C (CRIMINAL MATTERS) ( 3 )
Sub-Category
Bail/Cancellation of bail ( 11 )
Judicial Branch
CRIMINAL SECTION
Decision Date
16-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 18-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.AKASH NAYEK SHASHANKA SHEKHAR SAHA
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Justice Tirthankar GhoshView PDF
Summary The Calcutta High Court rejected Akash Nayek's bail application in a murder case (IPC §302/34 and Arms Act §25/27). The court denied bail despite the petitioner's argument that 23 prosecution witnesses provided insufficient evidence, citing the advanced stage of proceedings. The court granted the prosecution two additional months to examine three remaining witnesses, after which the petitioner may reapply for bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Jun-2026
New Bail Application
Hon'ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh
-
15-Jun-2026
New Bail Application
Hon'ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh
-
12-Jun-2026
New Bail Application
Hon'ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh
-
11-Jun-2026
New Bail Application
Hon'ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)
-
05-Jun-2026
Application For Bail
Hon'ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)
-
03-Jun-2026
Application For Bail
Hon'ble Justice Apurba Sinha Ray
-
29-May-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
26-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CRM(M)/1340/2026
Summary The Calcutta High Court rejected Akash Nayek's bail application in a murder case (IPC §302/34 and Arms Act §25/27). The court denied bail despite the petitioner's argument that 23 prosecution witnesses provided insufficient evidence, citing the advanced stage of proceedings. The court granted the prosecution two additional months to examine three remaining witnesses, after which the petitioner may reapply for bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts