MRITYUNJAY ROY vs The State of West Bengal — 18/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Rejected on 07th April 2026.

Case disposed

Criminal Misc.

CNR: WBBD110001642026

Filing Number

69/2026

Filing Date

19-Feb-2026

Registration No

18/2026

Registration Date

19-Feb-2026

Court

Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalna, Burdwan

Judge

1-ADJ

Decision Date

07-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Rejected

Last updated 14-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MRITYUNJAY ROY

    Adv. Bikash Roy

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of West Bengal

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Apr-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court rejected the bail petition of Mrityunjoy Roy, accused of poisoning a victim with industrial-grade sodium nitrate mixed in a cold drink during an office picnic. The judge found strong evidence of conspiracy and premeditated murder, including post-mortem confirmation of poisoning, FSL detection of carbofuran and sodium nitrate, and proof that poison was ordered via Amazon and administered by the petitioner, warranting his continued detention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    ADJ

  4. 20-Mar-2026

    Admission Hearing

    ADJ

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Admission Hearing

    ADJ

  6. 27-Feb-2026

    Admission Hearing

    ADJ

  7. 19-Feb-2026

    OrderView PDF

  8. 19-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 19-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 18/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court rejected the bail petition of Mrityunjoy Roy, accused of poisoning a victim with industrial-grade sodium nitrate mixed in a cold drink during an office picnic. The judge found strong evidence of conspiracy and premeditated murder, including post-mortem confirmation of poisoning, FSL detection of carbofuran and sodium nitrate, and proof that poison was ordered via Amazon and administered by the petitioner, warranting his continued detention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case