AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
9 paragraphs · 215 wordsS. Datta Purkayastha, J
Heard learned counsel of both sides.
The application has been filed for extending the period of bail which was granted by this Court on 27.03.2026 in BA No.58 of 2026, giving liberty to the accused to remain on interim bail till 26.04.2026.
Mr. Ratan Datta, learned counsel, referring to the admission receipt of Peerless Hospital submits that the son of the accused was admitted to the said hospital on 06.04.2026 and that his condition is serious and till date he is admitted therein. According to the learned counsel, the period of interim bail is required to be extended further so that the father can take care of his son during such hospitalization and treatment.
In this circumstances Mr. Raju Datta, learned PP has not opposed the prayer.
Considered the submissions. Accordingly, a further period of one month is extended.
The accused may surrender before the learned SDJM, Mohanpur on 25.05.2026. A copy of this order be sent to the learned SDJM, Mohanpur, as well as to the IO of the case.
A bond with similar terms and conditions as embodied in the order dated 27.03.2026 in BA No.58 of 2026 may be filed on behalf of the accused by 26.04.2026 before the learned SDJM, Mohanpur.
Interlocutory application is, accordingly, disposed of.