SAMIR HALDER @ SAMIR KUMAR HALDER SOURAV MUKHERJEE vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL — CRM(M)/1381/2025

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 439. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 10th April 2026.

CNR: WBCHCA0378962025

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

18th August 2025

Filing Number

CRM(M)/1407/2025

Filing Date

11-08-2025

Registration No

CRM(M)/1381/2025

Registration Date

12-08-2025

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

10th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 439
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483
Indian Penal Code Act ,1860 Section 302/120B/34
Arms Act Section 27

Petitioner(s)

SAMIR HALDER @ SAMIR KUMAR HALDER SOURAV MUKHERJEE

Respondent(s)

STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE TIRTHANKAR GHOSH

18-08-2025

APPLICATION FOR BAIL

10-04-2026

APPLICATION FOR BAIL

09-04-2026

APPLICATION FOR BAIL

08-04-2026

APPLICATION FOR BAIL

07-04-2026

APPLICATION FOR BAIL

Orders

10-04-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE TIRTHANKAR GHOSH

Case Summary The court rejected Samir Halder's bail application despite him being in custody for over 3 years and 8 months. While acknowledging the prolonged detention and invoking the Supreme Court's speedy trial principle, the court found that sufficient evidence (CCTV footage and 35 examined witnesses) established his complicity in the crime. The court directed the prosecution to conclude witness examination by December 31, 2026 without conducting a de novo trial for newly arrested co-accused, permitting the petitioner to renew his bail plea thereafter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The court rejected Samir Halder's bail application despite him being in custody for over 3 years and 8 months. While acknowledging the prolonged detention and invoking the Supreme Court's speedy trial principle, the court found that sufficient evidence (CCTV footage and 35 examined witnesses) established his complicity in the crime. The court directed the prosecution to conclude witness examination by December 31, 2026 without conducting a de novo trial for newly arrested co-accused, permitting the petitioner to renew his bail plea thereafter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case