ORDERS/JUDGEMENTSGST Registration Cancellation Unsustainable When Hearing & Decision Were Made By Different Authorities: Calcutta High CourtCase Title: S.K.M. Timber Private Limited v. Superintendent of Central Tax, Burrabazar Division, Kolkata North CGST & CX Commissionerate and othersCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 1The Calcutta High Court held that a GST registration cancellation order...
ORDERS/JUDGEMENTS
Case Title: S.K.M. Timber Private Limited v. Superintendent of Central Tax, Burrabazar Division, Kolkata North CGST & CX Commissionerate and others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 1
The Calcutta High Court held that a GST registration cancellation order is unsustainable where the personal hearing is granted by one authority, but the final order is passed by another.
Justice Om Narayan Rai stated that, interestingly, while the notice for personal hearing was issued by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & CX, Burrabazar Division, but the order impugned has been passed by the Superintendent. The order therefore defies the very well-settled principle that an order must be passed by the authority that hears the parties or that one who hears must decide.
Case Title: Shri Manoj Kumar Verma v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 2
The Calcutta High Court has ruled that forfeiture of earnest money deposit (EMD) under the Railway e-auction framework cannot be sustained merely on the ground of an inadvertent or clerical mistake in uploading documents, unless the authorities first record a finding that the bidder acted with an intent to mislead.
Holding that forfeiture is penal in nature and entails serious civil consequences, Justice Smita Das De quashed the Railways' decision to forfeit ₹7,45,321 from the petitioner, observing that such action must satisfy the tests of proportionality, fairness and mens rea.
Case Title: Sajal Dutta v. Reserve Bank of India and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 3
The Calcutta High Court held that the RBI (Reserve Bank of India) is empowered under the FERA (Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973) to permit allotment of shares to an NRI against the import of second-hand capital equipment on a non-repatriation basis.
Justices Madhuresh Prasad and Supratim Bhattacharya stated that the RBI, while allowing the permission, also relied upon the Government of India letter dated 03.01.1994 wherein the Central Government issued policy directive that in such a case, as arose for consideration herein, where the amount is directly paid by the NRI for importing second-hand capital goods, the investment was permissible only on a non-repatriable basis.
Case Title: Equate Petrochemical Company K.S.C.C. v. Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGRT) & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 4
The Calcutta High Court has recently held that a petitioner's mere apprehension of business loss in West Bengal is not enough to invoke the court's territorial jurisdiction in a writ petition.
A single-judge bench of Justice Om Narayan Rai, while dismissing a plea filed by a Kuwait company said that it is the infringement of a legal right that gives rise to a cause of action.
"The lis before this Court is only with regard to the violation of the petitioner's right to fair treatment and fair adjudication based on the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and not with regard to the petitioner's apprehension of loss of business in West Bengal. In such a view of the matter, the petitioner's apprehension cannot form the basis of the writ petition in West Bengal", the bench said.
Case: SMITA BAJORIA VS RCTC ASSOCIATION AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 5
The Calcutta High Court has restrained the Royal Calcutta Turf Club (RCTC) and its office-bearers from giving effect to a supplementary development agreement dated September 20, 2025, holding that the plaintiff-member had made out a strong prima facie case of non-transparency and material alterations to the project without adequate disclosure to members.
Justice Arindam Mukherjee found that the so-called “supplementary” agreement was prima facie not a mere continuation of the earlier 2022 development agreement, but introduced substantial changes in the nature and character of the project, ownership and developer allocations, security deposit terms, and even the composition of the developer LLP. The Court noted that one of the LLP partners had exited, yet the agreement was executed and registered during the pendency of earlier litigation involving the same developer.
Bank Can't Freeze Company's Accounts Solely Over ROC's 'Management Dispute' Tag: Calcutta High Court
Case Title: Ravindra Pratap and another vs Reserve Bank of India and others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 6
The Calcutta High Court has held that a bank cannot freeze a company's accounts merely on the basis of a “management dispute” marking by the Registrar of Companies (ROC), particularly after such marking has been removed on the directions of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA).
Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Supratim Bhattacharya made the observation on January 5 while hearing appeals filed by Ravindra Pratap Singh, director of August Agents Limited, challenging the freezing of the company's bank and demat accounts by Axis Bank in June 2021.
Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Patent Office Order Rejecting US Company's Glass Fibre Patent
Case Title: OCV Intellectual Capital LLC v. The Controller General Of Patent
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 7
The Calcutta High Court has set aside a Patent Office order rejecting a patent application filed by OCV Intellectual Capital LLC, a subsidiary of Owens Corning. The court held that the refusal was passed without proper analysis of novelty and inventive step.
A single-judge bench of Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur, in a judgment dated January 6, 2026, held that the Patent Office rejected the application without engaging with the technical submissions made by the company or recording clear reasons explaining how the invention was covered by prior art.
Case Name : Union of India & Ors. vs. Mita Saha Karmakar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 8
A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen held that a divorced daughter is entitled to family pension if she was dependent on the pensioner and that divorce proceedings were initiated during the pensioner's lifetime.
Case Title: Dr. Soma Mandal Debnath v. Sri Tanmoy Debnath
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 9
The Calcutta High Court has held that a husband maligning his wife at her workplace, questioning her chastity and abusing her before colleagues, amounts to mental cruelty warranting dissolution of marriage.
A Division Bench of Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Supratim Bhattacharya observed that public humiliation, character assassination, and professional defamation inflicted by a spouse strike at the core of an individual's dignity and mental peace, and cannot be brushed aside as trivial marital discord.
Case Title: Suranjan Mandal @ Suranjoy Mandal v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 10
The Calcutta High Court has held that abusing a person by calling them by their caste name, such as “Adivasi” or “Santhal”, in a place within public view, with the intent to humiliate, can amount to an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta dismissed a criminal revision petition seeking quashing of proceedings under Sections 341, 323, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, observing that the allegations disclosed the essential ingredients of the offences and warranted a full-fledged trial. The Court clarified that at the quashing stage, it cannot conduct a roving inquiry into the truthfulness or reliability of the allegations, and that a trial is necessary to uncover the truth.
Case Name : Piyali Sarkar vs. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 11
A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising Justice Madhuresh Prasad and Justice Prasenjit Biswas held that disobedience of a lawful order by a member of a disciplined force like CISF constitutes misconduct regardless of prior intimation of non‑compliance.
Case: Basudeb Bagchi & Anr. v. Enforcement Directorate
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 12
The Calcutta High Court has rejected the regular bail plea of Prayag Group directors Basudeb Bagchi and Avik Bagchi in a money laundering case involving alleged defrauding of thousands of investors to the tune of over ₹2,862 crore, holding that the gravity of the offence, their status as proclaimed offenders, and the existence of massive untraced proceeds of crime disentitle them from any relief under Section 45 of the PMLA.
A Division Bench of Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj and Justice Uday Kumar observed that economic offences involving public money form a “class apart” and must be viewed through a stricter judicial lens, particularly where the life savings of common citizens are involved. The Court emphasised that white-collar criminals cannot be allowed to treat the law with disdain and that personal liberty under Article 21 cannot be examined in isolation from the collective interests of defrauded investors.
Case Title: Ratan Karmakar & Ors. v. Smt. Chaina Das & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 13
The Calcutta High Court has reiterated that a landlord is the best judge of his own residential and business requirements and that courts cannot dictate how a person should live or prescribe a particular standard of accommodation. Dismissing a second appeal filed by a tenant, the Court upheld a decree of eviction on the ground of reasonable requirement under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956.
Justice Sugato Majumdar, while affirming the judgment of the First Appellate Court, observed that the concept of “reasonable requirement” cannot be approached with a rigid or hyper-technical mindset, as such needs vary from family to family, time to time, and situation to situation.
Case: Bikash Rath & Ors. v. Election Commission of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 14
The Calcutta High Court has set aside a directive issued by the Election Commission of India (EC) that sought to requisition employees of Balageria Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. for duties in connection with the upcoming West Bengal Legislative Assembly elections, 2026. The petitioners, employees of the autonomous cooperative bank, challenged the communication dated 19th September 2025, which required their details to be uploaded on the EC's portal for the preparation of the election personnel database.
Case Title: Jagannath Heights Pvt Ltd v. M/S Sammaan Capital Limited
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 15
The Calcutta High Court recently rejected a Master's summons application filed by M/s Samman Capital Limited, that sought stay of a commercial suit on the grounds of an existing arbitration clause.
Master's summons under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) refers to a court order (summons) compelling a party to appear, often to provide documents or information relevant to an insolvency proceeding or specific case issues.
Promotion Can Be Deferred If Disciplinary Appeal Is Pending: Calcutta High Court
Case Title: Debanjan Guha v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 16
The Calcutta High Court has held that an employee does not acquire an indefeasible right to promotion merely by securing a high position in the merit list, and that promotion can be legitimately deferred if a statutory disciplinary appeal is pending consideration.
Dismissing a writ petition filed by a senior employee of the West Bengal Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd. (WBSIDCL), Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee ruled that the Selection Committee was justified in keeping the petitioner's promotion in abeyance until the disciplinary proceedings reached their logical conclusion.
Case Title: Sri Jibananda Pal v Sanjukta Biswas
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 17
The Calcutta High Court has directed a fresh local investigation in a long-pending property dispute after finding deficiencies in the manner in which an earlier Advocate Commissioner's report was prepared and accepted by the Trial Court.
The bench of Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury observed,
"Right to property although not a Fundamental right but is a Constitutional Right. A person has right to use and enjoy property lawfully occupied by him without interference by others. Hence when a dispute arises with regard to encroachment of property and interference in the peaceful use and occupation of such property and adjudication of such dispute depends upon measurement of suit property and the report of the commissioner, such report should be clear and specific so that it becomes easy for the Court to arrive at a decision upon considering the said report".
Case Title: Jhantu Sarkar v Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 18
The Calcutta High Court, on Wednesday (January 21), dismissed the petition filed by an aspirant of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) challenging the review medical examination that declared him unfit for service.
The bench held that while a candidate has a right to review, the removal of a tattoo after the detailed medical examination but before the review medical examination, to be declared medically fit, is impermissible.
Case Title: Basudeb Bagchi v ED
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 19
The Calcutta High Court has rejected the bail applications of Prayag Group's directors, observing that they failed to discharge the twin condition test under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and their status as proclaimed offenders.
While hearing the bail applications, the division bench of Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj and Justice Uday Kumar also emphasized,
"the liberty of an individual cannot be viewed in isolation from the collective interests of thousands of defrauded investors. The petitioners' failure to discharge the "Twin Conditions," coupled with their conduct as Proclaimed Offenders, creates a formidable legal barrier to their release".
Case Title: Nishikanta Hawladar & Soumen Mondal v State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 20
The Calcutta High Court, on Thursday (January 22), suspended the conviction of two men under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, noting that the Raiding Officer/ Office making inventory had mixed the seized contraband packets even though the law does not authorise the same.
The bench of Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Apurba Sinha Ray observed,
"There is no material to show when and how the said 80 packets were mixed up and who ordered for such mixture. This goes against basic duties of the Raiding Officers/Officers making inventory to classify and make separate arrangements for seized contraband items. The Law does not allow the seizing or the Officer making inventory to mix up the seized contrabands".
Case Title: Humayun Kabir vs. State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 21
The Calcutta High Court permitted Bharatpur MLA Humayun Kabir, a former member of Trinamool Congress who has floated his own political party, to approach the Union Ministry of Home Affairs seeking Z+ security.
Notably, Kabir founded the Janata Unnayan Party last year.
Kabir had submitted that he was a member of West Bengal Legislative Assembly under the banner of the ruling political dispensation and has presently formed his own political party. He said he apprehends threat to his life and property and seeks deployment of police personnel, preferably of Z+ category for his protection.
Case Title: Dev Sahitya Kutir Pvt Ltd v Archana Debnath
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 22
The Calcutta High Court has upheld a trial court's Court's interim injunction order restraining Kolkata-based publishing house Dev Sahitya Kutir Pvt Ltd from printing, publishing, selling, or distributing the literary and artistic works of the late eminent author and cartoonist Narayan Debnath till February 9.
In doing so the court said that the author's widow as executor of Debnath's Will and plaintiff no. 2 i.e., their son as legatee of the Will are completely entitled to maintain the suit before the trial court, even before Probate is granted under Indian Succession Act.
Case Title: BABULAL JADAB v STATE
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 23
The Calcutta High Court has directed the Judicial Department to reconsider the plea for premature release of a life convict incarcerated for 32 years, observing that the rejection was merely speculative.
The division bench of Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Apurba Sinha Ray emphasized that jails were renamed 'correctional homes' to reform offenders and reintegrate them into mainstream society. However, if release has to be denied even after 32 years incarceration, it reflects that State has failed to discharge its obligation.
Third Party Suits In Deity's Name Permitted Only When 'Sebait' Loses Authority: Calcutta High Court
Case Title: Sri Sri Dodhimohan Jew v The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 24
The Calcutta High Court has held that a third party may institute proceedings in the deity's name only in exceptional circumstances where the lawful sebait has lost or disabled himself from exercising his authority.
The division bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya observed,
"Only in exceptional circumstances, where the sebait does not or by his own act, deprives himself of the power of representing the deity, a third party is competent to institute a suit in the name of the deity to protect the debottar property".
Case Title: Lt. Gen. Dr. Subrata Saha v Union of Indian and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 25
The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday (27 January) directed the West Bengal government to hand over by March 31, the land along Indo-Bangladesh Border (IB) in nine districts which it has acquired, to the Border Security Force (BSF) for the purpose of fencing.
The directions were issued by the Division bench comprising Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen while considering a public interest litigation filed by a former Deputy Chief of Army Staff highlighting large stretches of the Indo-Bangladesh Border remaining unfenced in West Bengal.
Case Title: Child in conflict with law v The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 26
The Calcutta High Court has quashed proceedings initiated under the Juvenile Justice Act against a child driving a four-wheeler with a blue beacon and a dashboard sign reading "judge", after noting that the inquiry had remained inconclusive beyond the four months prescribed under Section 14(2) of the JJ Act.
The bench of Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee observed,
"The consequence of the failure to adhere to the provisions as laid down in section 14(2) is mentioned in section 14(4) of the Act as quoted above. In the instant case charge sheet was filed beyond the period of 4(four) months and even after the extended period which expired on 27.05.2024 (i.e. 6 months since the first appearance of the delinquent juvenile before the Juvenile Justice Board) the inquiry as stipulated under section 14(2) of the Act remain inconclusive as the plea of the delinquent juvenile had not been recorded till the granting of the stay by this High court on 12.07.2024. Therefore it is clear that in the instant case within the maximum time frame for conclusion of inquiry as mentioned in section 14(4), inquiry has not been concluded".
18-Months Delay In Pronouncement Of Judgment Alone Not Ground To Set It Aside: Calcutta High Court
Case Title: New Parijat Co-operative Housing Society Limited v Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 27
The Calcutta High Court, on Thursday (January 29), dismissed an appeal challenging a Single Bench judgment on the ground that it was delivered about 18 months after the date of conclusion of the final hearing.
The division bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya observed;
"...although we are somewhat disappointed at the long delay of more than 18 months from the conclusion of the arguments to the delivery of the impugned judgment, we are unable to set aside the same solely on the ground of such delay".
Calcutta High Court Orders Creche Facility In Court Premises To Become Functional Within 30 Days
Case Title: Atasi Ghosh v State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 28
The Calcutta High Court, on Thursday (January 22), directed its registry to ensure that creche facility in the court premises becomes operational within 30 days.
The bench also directed the PWD to ensure two doctors and one nurse report to the High Court Administration one day prior to the opening, and that the aluminium grills that need to be fixed on the creche windows are fixed within stipulated timeframe.
Case Title: Asish Bera & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 29
Observing that a second criminal proceeding on the “self-same incident” with identical allegations cannot be sustained and would amount to an abuse of the process of law, the Calcutta High Court has quashed a dowry harassment and attempt to murder case instituted against a husband and his family members.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das held that once an earlier FIR had already been registered regarding the same occurrence, the de-facto complainant could not initiate another complaint before a different forum under Section 156(3) CrPC. The Court found material inconsistencies in the prosecution's case, omnibus and general allegations against the in-laws, and the absence of specific overt acts, concluding that continuation of the proceedings would be unjust.
Case: Swapan Kumar Manna & Ors. Versus State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 30
The Calcutta High Court has held that the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (WBBSE) cannot withdraw co-education facilities from a school merely to protect the enrolment of a nearby girls' school. The Court quashed the Board's orders, which restricted admission of girl students in Classes V to VIII at Sonamui Co-Education School.
Justice Krishna Rao noted that Sonamui Co-Education School has been a recognised co-educational institution since 6 January 1965 and that no violation of statutory or regulatory conditions by the school was established by the Board.
Case: Sankar Ghosh v The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 31
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed an intra-court appeal filed by an MLA challenging the refusal of police permission to hold a sit-in demonstration in front of Nabanna, the headquarters of the West Bengal Government.
The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen upheld the order of the Single Judge permitting the protest to be held at an alternative location, holding that the right to protest is subject to reasonable restrictions regarding time and place.
Case: RIYA RAY@ ROY & ANR. VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 32
Holding that criminal law cannot be weaponised to settle personal scores in a residential dispute, the Calcutta High Court has quashed an FIR lodged by a woman against her neighbours — a mother and daughter — observing that the case appeared to be a “counterblast” to an earlier complaint and was riddled with delay, inconsistencies, and legal infirmities.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das found that the allegations stemmed from a trivial disagreement over locking the main gate of a residential building but had been exaggerated into serious charges, including attempt to murder, outraging modesty, and robbery. The Court held that continuation of such proceedings would amount to a gross abuse of the process of law.
Case Title: Jogesh Barman @ Doro Barman v. The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 33
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of a man under the Arms Act in a 36-year-old case, holding that the prosecution failed to prove lawful recovery of arms after every independent seizure witness disowned the alleged raid, rendering the alleged recovery “highly doubtful” and the conviction legally unsustainable.
Justice Prasenjit Biswas, allowing the appeal filed by Jogesh Barman @ Doro Barman, ruled that a conviction cannot rest solely on uncorroborated police testimony when all independent witnesses deny participation in the search and seizure. The Court underscored that proof of conscious and lawful recovery is the sine qua non for sustaining offences under the Arms Act, and once seizure witnesses themselves deny witnessing the recovery or preparation of the seizure list, the very foundation of the prosecution collapses.
Case: The Board of Governors, Ghani Khan Choudhury Institute of Engineering & Technology & Ors. Versus Deb Halder & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 34
A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court, comprising Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, has dismissed an appeal filed by the Board of Governors of the Ghani Khan Choudhury Institute of Engineering & Technology, upholding the order of a single Judge that quashed the termination of the Institute's Superintendent, Deb Halder, during his probationary period.
Case: Asraf Ali @ Firoj & Anr. v. State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 35
The Calcutta High Court, bench of Justice Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, has dismissed a criminal revision petition challenging the acceptance of a supplementary chargesheet filed at an advanced stage of trial in an NDPS case, holding that filing of a supplementary chargesheet under Section 173(8) CrPC is permissible where it is based on further investigation disclosing fresh material, even if the trial is nearing completion.
Case Title: Sajal Kanti Roy @ Subrata @ Subho & Anr. v. State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 36
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the conviction and life sentence of two appellants for the murder of a villager shot inside his home on the eve of Panchayat elections, holding that a spontaneous oral dying declaration made by the victim immediately after being shot, and heard by his family members, constituted reliable and admissible evidence under Sections 6, 7 and 32 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Case: Sk. Morsed Ali & Ors. Versus The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 37
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction and life sentence imposed on the appellants in a case relating to the alleged burning death of a married woman, holding that the prosecution failed to establish their culpability beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Division Bench of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta found serious inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence, unreliable testimony of child witnesses, unexplained investigative lapses, and material omissions in the inquest report, all of which cumulatively rendered the conviction unsustainable.
Case: PABITRA ROY & ORS. VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 38
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of multiple accused under Section 306/34 IPC, holding that the prosecution failed to establish the essential ingredients of abetment of suicide beyond a reasonable doubt.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das noted that although the deceased died by suicide, mere allegations of harassment or branding him a thief were insufficient to attract Section 306 IPC in the absence of clear mens rea, instigation, or a direct act leading the deceased to take his life.
Case Title: Chandan Dhara & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 39
The Calcutta High Court has directed the West Bengal Police recruitment authorities to publish the marks obtained in the written examination along with the respective categories of candidates shortlisted for the Physical Measurement Test (PMT) and Physical Efficiency Test (PET) in the ongoing recruitment process for Constables.
Justice Saugata Bhattacharya held that non-disclosure of these particulars undermines transparency and may unfairly deprive eligible candidates of participation in subsequent stages of selection.
Calcutta High Court Upholds Life Sentence In Double Murder-Dacoity Case
Case: Krishna Kanta Dhar & Others Vs. The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 40
The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi has dismissed three connected criminal appeals and upheld the conviction and sentence of the appellants for offences of dacoity with murder arising out of the brutal killing of two women at village Kandra, District Burdwan, on 1 October 2011.
The appeals arose from a common judgment of conviction dated 26 April 2018 and order of sentence dated 30 April 2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Katwa, in Sessions Trial No. 07 of 2012.
Case: Sri Manish Kumar Pandey Versus Union of India and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 41
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging the refusal of the Central Government to refer an industrial dispute for adjudication, holding that an industrial dispute raised after an inordinate and unexplained delay cannot be revived merely on the strength of a failure report under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta was hearing a challenge to the order dated 28 June 2019 passed by the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, refusing to refer the petitioner's dispute with Bank of India to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. The petitioner, a former clerk-cum-accounts clearance staff of Bank of India, sought a direction for reference of the dispute relating to his compulsory retirement from service.
Case: DR. PRADIP KUMAR GHOSH VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR
CitationP 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 42
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a criminal revisional application seeking quashing of criminal proceedings relating to the alleged illegal filling up of water bodies and violation of land use laws in connection with a proposed university project at the Ramkrishna Vivekananda Mission campus. Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das held that the allegations raised disputed questions of fact requiring detailed examination and could not be decided at the threshold under the Court's revisional or inherent jurisdiction.
Case: CHANDESWHWAR SHAW AND ORS. -VS- STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 43
In a judgment delivered on February 4, 2026, a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court, comprising Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen, dismissed an intra-Court appeal filed by Chandeswhwar Shaw and others challenging the eviction order passed in WPA 15989 of 2024.
The appellants had sought to overturn an order of a Single Bench dated June 20, 2024, which had granted police assistance to the writ petitioner—the Syama Prasad Mookerjee (SMPK) Port Authority—for the removal of unauthorised occupants from land adjacent to the Port, specifically the approach road to the SMPK Centenary Hospital in Kolkata.
Case: SK. ENAMUL HOSSAIN VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 44
The Calcutta High Court recently quashed the criminal proceedings against Sk. Enamul Hossain, a daily-wage labourer, in a case registered by Datan Police Station, Paschim Medinipur under Sections 379/411/34 IPC for alleged possession of stolen cash amounting to Rs. 15,96,000/-.
Case: National Insurance Co. Ltd. VERSUS Lirasa Bibi And Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 45
The Calcutta High Court recently ruled that a motor insurance company cannot recover compensation from a vehicle owner without giving them an opportunity to be heard regarding alleged violations of the insurance policy. The judgment was delivered by Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury on February 4, 2026, in F.M.A. 1003 of 2025, involving National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Lirasa Bibi & Anr.
Case: THE WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED & ORS. VS JYOTISH CHANDRA RICE MILL & ORS.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 46
The Calcutta High Court has held that the West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. (WBSEDCL) cannot recover a supplemental electricity bill of Rs. 55.8 lakh from Jyotish Chandra Rice Mill.
Case: General Manager, Eastern Railway VERSUS Ajmira Mirja
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 47
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed an appeal by the Eastern Railway challenging a compensation award to the family of a worker who died in a workplace accident. The judgment was delivered by Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury.
The case arose from an accident on December 23, 2006, in which Allarkha Mirja, a worker employed through a contractor, was fatally struck by the 2509 up Bangalore-Guwahati Express near Noadbradhal Railway Station. The deceased sustained serious injuries and died on the spot. The respondent, Ajmira Mirja, wife of the deceased, filed a claim under the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923, seeking compensation as a dependent.
Case: MD. ASHIK MONDAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (48)
The Calcutta High Court has held that palmar hyperhidrosis (excessive sweating of palms) is not a valid ground to declare a candidate medically unfit for appointment as Constable (G.D.) in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs).
The Court observed that the recruitment authorities failed to demonstrate any specific provision under the applicable medical guidelines which disqualifies a candidate on account of palmar hyperhidrosis.
Case: PRABIR MUKHOPADHYAY @ PRABIR MUKHERJEE VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 49
The Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a senior retired official of the West Bengal Financial Corporation (WBFC), holding that continuation of the case would amount to a gross abuse of the process of law.
The Court found that the FIR and subsequent charge-sheet, arising out of an alleged incident of trespass, criminal intimidation and outraging modesty, were lodged with an ulterior motive to stall loan recovery proceedings initiated by WBFC.
Case: Jagjit Kumar Versus The State & Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 50
“Although we are happy and indeed, rejoicing that our daughters have won the World Cup in Cricket recently… the passing away of Rudrika at the age of one and half years reminds us that still we have to go a long way to achieve complete equality for our girl children,” the Calcutta High Court Circuit Bench at Port Blair observed while setting aside the discharge of a woman's in-laws in a dowry death case and directing that they face trial.
Case Title: Shri Krishna Mohan Das v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 51
Observing that an accused cannot be made to suffer because of a “deficient, casual and cryptic” cross-examination conducted by his previous counsel, the Calcutta High Court (Circuit Bench at Port Blair) has set aside a trial court order refusing to recall prosecution witnesses in a POCSO case and permitted limited re-cross-examination to ensure a fair defence.
Justice Apurba Sinha Ray held that while courts must be cautious about recalling vulnerable witnesses in sexual offence cases, the right of the accused to effectively defend himself cannot be sacrificed, particularly where the earlier cross-examination appears inadequate and may prejudice the defence.
Case Title: State v. M. Hari Krishna
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 52
Reiterating that proof of both demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is sine qua non for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the Calcutta High Court (Circuit Bench at Port Blair) has upheld the acquittal of a Revenue Officer accused of accepting a ₹5,000 bribe for processing a land mutation application.
Justice Apurba Sinha Ray dismissed the State's appeal against acquittal, observing that the prosecution failed to establish the foundational facts necessary to raise the statutory presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Court held that mere recovery of tainted money or trap formalities, without credible proof of demand and acceptance, cannot sustain conviction.
Case Title: Bidhi Chand Chowrasia v. State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 53
Observing that a criminal conviction cannot rest on doubtful stock measurement done with a stick and unsupported by reliable independent witnesses, the Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of a petrol pump operator under the Essential Commodities Act, holding that the prosecution failed to prove violation of stock and display requirements beyond a reasonable doubt.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das allowed a criminal appeal filed by Bidhi Chand Chowrasia and overturned the 1992 conviction recorded by a Special Court under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act for alleged shortage of high-speed diesel (HSD) stock and non-display of stock and price information.
Case Title: Arnab Paul v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 54
Observing that an accused has no right of audience in matters concerning the manner or mode of investigation, the Calcutta High Court has dismissed applications seeking impleadment in a writ petition filed for investigation into alleged police inaction and collusion. The Court held that neither a complainant in a separate FIR nor persons who are merely prospective accused can insist on being added as parties at the investigation stage.
Case Title: Sambhu Das @ Shambhu Das & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 55
The Calcutta High Court has held that a criminal conviction cannot be sustained on the basis of vague and omnibus allegations without any specific role attributed to the accused, especially where independent witnesses do not support the prosecution and material contradictions exist regarding the manner and place of occurrence.
Allowing a criminal revision petition, Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta set aside the concurrent findings of the Trial Court and the Appellate Court which had convicted a man under Section 323 of the IPC (voluntarily causing hurt), observing that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt or prove any common intention.
Case: Smti. Kishori Bala Das Versus The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 56
The Calcutta High Court Circuit Bench at Port Blair has held that a demolition order passed by a municipal authority cannot be directly challenged under Article 226 of the Constitution when an effective statutory appellate remedy is available, observing that the competent officer had passed a reasoned order after granting a hearing to all stakeholders.
Justice Apurba Sinha Ray dismissed a writ petition filed by Smti. Kishori Bala Das challenging a demolition direction issued by the Executive Engineer (Planning), Municipal Council, and granted her liberty to pursue the appellate remedy in accordance with law.
Case Title: Andaman Plantations and Development Corporation Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. The Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 57
The Calcutta High Court Circuit Bench at Port Blair has set aside an order rejecting tsunami compensation to Andaman Plantations and Development Corporation Pvt. Ltd., holding that relief under the Tsunami Rehabilitation Package cannot be denied merely because the claimant is a company and not an individual farmer. The Court directed the Andaman and Nicobar Administration to reassess and pay admissible compensation in accordance with the applicable policy within twelve weeks.
Justice Apurba Sinha Ray observed that the authorities could not reopen issues that had already been settled by earlier judicial findings, particularly the determination that the petitioner-company's activities were agricultural in nature and that it functioned as a farming enterprise. The Court noted that these findings had been affirmed up to the Division Bench and continued to hold the field.
Case Title: T.R. Rakesh Kumar v. State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 58
Observing that a criminal conviction under the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act cannot rest solely on oral testimony when the prosecution fails to seize, produce or otherwise prove the existence of the allegedly damaged property, the Calcutta High Court Circuit Bench at Port Blair has set aside the conviction of a man accused of vandalising equipment at a government hospital and acquitted him of all charges.
Case: SHIBU BARMAN @ KUBAL VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 59
Observing that suspicion, however strong, cannot substitute proof beyond reasonable doubt, the Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of a man accused of murdering his wife, holding that the prosecution failed to establish a complete and reliable chain of circumstantial evidence. The Court ruled that the “last seen together” theory by itself is a weak piece of evidence and cannot form the sole basis of conviction, particularly where there are gaps in the timeline and lack of corroboration.
Case Details: Pradip Agarwal & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 60
The Calcutta High Court has held that the mere pendency or dismissal of civil proceedings over property title does not bar criminal prosecution where serious allegations of forgery, fabrication of public records, and conspiracy are disclosed. Refusing to quash an FIR alleging use of a forged 1963 sale deed to grab land and secure bank loans, the Court observed that questions relating to genuineness of documents and criminal intent must be investigated and cannot be short-circuited under Section 482 CrPC.
Case: ABHIJIT TIE UP (P) LTD AND ORS Vs VIVEK KUMAR STATE OF WB ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 61
Observing that contempt jurisdiction is meant to secure compliance with court orders and not to grant fresh or additional reliefs, the Calcutta High Court has held that once authorities implement a writ direction to mutate names in land records, petitioners cannot seek further corrections such as change in the nature or character of the land through contempt proceedings. The Court emphasised that contempt powers are supervisory and punitive in nature and cannot be used to enlarge the scope of the original judgment.
Case: Sri Sandip Kumar Saha v. Somnath Saha & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 62
The Calcutta High Court has held that a final decree in a partition suit cannot be fully executed unless it is duly engrossed on stamped paper upon payment of the requisite stamp duty, observing that compliance with the Stamp Act is a condition precedent for execution. At the same time, the Court clarified that to avoid delay in enforcement, the decree holder may deposit the entire stamp duty for the whole property and subsequently recover proportionate shares from the other co-sharers.
Case: Mahadeb Das @ Manadev Das v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 63
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the conviction of a man for voluntarily causing hurt in a 2005 assault case but extended the benefit of probation in view of the passage of time, observing that after two decades and absence of criminal antecedents, sending the accused to jail would serve little purpose. The Court modified the sentence and directed payment of bonds and compensation instead of imprisonment.
Case Title: Shree Garden Resort Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 64
Emphasising that land acquired for “employment generation and socio-economic development” cannot be invalidated merely because the implementing agency changes, the Calcutta High Court has held that acquisition for setting up an industrial park constitutes a clear “public purpose” under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and cannot be attacked as acquisition for a private company simply because the land is later leased to an industrial unit.
Case: The Director of Technical Education and Training Versus Lila Lohar & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 65
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a batch of appeals filed by the State of West Bengal and the Director of Technical Education and Training challenging orders that granted permanent government employee status and full Group-D service benefits to hostel/mess employees working in Government and Sponsored Polytechnics.
A Division Bench of Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee held that the issue is no longer res integra, observing that earlier Division Bench rulings extending similar benefits had already been affirmed by the Supreme Court and therefore there was no justification to reopen the controversy.
Case: Parraj Automobiles Private Limited – Versus – Mr. Samiran Sinha
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 66
The Calcutta High Court has reiterated that a post-employment non-compete clause restraining an employee from joining a competitor after resignation is prima facie void under Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, but clarified that confidentiality obligations and non-solicitation covenants aimed at protecting trade secrets and business interests remain enforceable.
Case Title: Hemant Kanoria & Anr. v. Indian Overseas Bank
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 67
The Calcutta High Court has held that a bank cannot proceed to classify a borrower's account as “fraud” without first supplying the forensic audit report and the documents relied upon in the show cause notice, observing that principles of natural justice cannot be sacrificed in the name of expedition under the Reserve Bank of India's Master Directions.
Justice Krishna Rao set aside Indian Overseas Bank's decision declaring the petitioners' account as fraud, noting that an effective opportunity to respond is illusory unless the material forming the basis of the allegations is disclosed.
Case Title: Enforcement Directorate & Anr. v. Sri Suman Chattopadhyay & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaew (Cal) 68
The Calcutta High Court has held that once a provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) stands confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority and statutory appeals are pending before the Appellate Tribunal, a parallel writ challenge becomes academic and should not be entertained.
Setting aside a Single Judge's order quashing the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) provisional attachment, a Division Bench of Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj and Justice Uday Kumar emphasised that writ courts must exercise restraint where the statute provides a complete adjudicatory mechanism.
Case: Pradyut Samanta v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 69
The Calcutta High Court has reiterated that mere non-payment of business dues or breach of contractual obligations cannot be dressed up as offences of cheating or criminal breach of trust, and that criminal proceedings cannot be used as a pressure tactic for recovery of money. Quashing an FIR against a small poultry feed trader, the Court held that in the absence of dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction, offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC are not made out.
Case: Ram Babu Yadav Vs. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 70
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the Eastern Railway's decision cancelling a parcel leaseholder's registration, terminating his contracts, forfeiting deposits and debarring him for five years, holding that preparation of separate manifests for two unloading terminals does not amount to a “false declaration” or fraud in the absence of proof of mens rea or loss to the Railways. The Court observed that blacklisting has drastic civil consequences and cannot be imposed mechanically for operational or clerical discrepancies.
Case Title: Magma HDI General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tarun Majumder & Ors. with cross-objection Tarun Majumder & Anr. v. Magma HDI General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 71
The Calcutta High Court has enhanced compensation payable to the family of a woman who died in a road accident to ₹69.10 lakh after reassessing her annual income and adding future prospects, while simultaneously reducing the interest rate from 7.5% to 6% per annum. The Court held that cash compensatory allowance forming part of the deceased's earnings ought to be reasonably factored into the income calculation for determining just compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
Case Title: Uttam Mondal v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 72
The Calcutta High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against a man accused of stalking, assault, attempting to outrage a woman's modesty and criminal intimidation, observing that once charges have been framed and trial has progressed, the High Court must exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC with extreme caution and only in the “rarest of rare cases.” The Court held that disputed facts and sufficiency of evidence cannot be examined in a quashing petition.
Case: Narayan Chandra Gorai Versus The State of West Bengal & Another
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 73
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of a mustard oil mill co-owner in a decades-old food adulteration case, holding that doubtful seizure proceedings and inconsistent laboratory reports strike at the root of the prosecution's case and make conviction unsafe. The Court reiterated that when material discrepancies arise in expert evidence and seizure is not properly proved, the benefit of doubt must go to the accused.
Case: Md. Amjad @ Md. Amzad @ Amjed v. State of West Bengal & Ors.,
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 74
The Calcutta High Court has held that while the State Government must obtain the opinion of the presiding judge of the convicting or confirming court before deciding a life convict's application for remission or premature release under Section 432(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, such opinion must be reasoned, informed and based on relevant factors, and cannot be mechanically accepted as conclusive. Setting aside the West Bengal Government's rejection of a life convict's premature release solely on the basis of an adverse judicial opinion, the Court directed the Chief Judge, City Sessions Court, Kolkata, to furnish a fresh, legally compliant opinion and asked the State to reconsider the case thereafter.
Case: Moumita Bhattacharya v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 75
The Calcutta High Court has held that professional disagreements, administrative disputes or alleged workplace humiliation cannot automatically attract offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act unless there is clear, caste-based insult or intimidation in public view. Quashing criminal proceedings against a Sanskrit professor, the Court observed that “not every intentional insult” to a member of the Scheduled Caste community amounts to an atrocity under Section 3(1)(r) of the Act.
Case Name : P.K. Chattopadhyay vs. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 76
A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen held that a senior government employee is entitled to stepping up of pay at par with a junior if both are in the same cadre, same post, and same pay scale, and the junior is drawing higher pay, and earlier higher pay in an ex-cadre post cannot justify permanent pay disparity.
Case Title: M/s Heinen & Hopman Engineering (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 77
The High Court at Calcutta has held that pension payable under an employer's superannuation trust can fall within the definition of “wages” under the Payment of Wages Act, and that employees who resign after completing the prescribed years of qualifying service cannot be denied pension merely because they did not retire on superannuation.
A Division Bench of Justices Lanusungkum Jamir and Rai Chattopadhyay dismissed four intra-court appeals filed by Heinen & Hopman Engineering (I) Pvt. Ltd., affirming a Single Judge's decision which had upheld the jurisdiction of the authority under the West Bengal Shops and Establishments Act to entertain employees' claims for pension through Form-N proceedings.
Case: Anirban Mukherjee v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 78
Holding that a prolonged consensual relationship between two adults cannot later be converted into a rape prosecution merely because the relationship soured or marriage did not materialise, the High Court at Calcutta has quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 417, 376, 313 and 506 IPC against a man accused of sexual assault and forced abortion on the pretext of marriage. The Court observed that for a promise to marry to vitiate consent, the promise must be false from the very inception, and not a subsequent breach arising out of a failed relationship.
Case: West Bengal Power Development Corporation Ltd. v. Union of India & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 79
The Calcutta High Court has held that graduate trainees receiving only stipends cannot automatically be treated as “employees” for the purpose of provident fund contributions. At the same time, the Court upheld PF liability in respect of security personnel and fire-fighting staff directly engaged and paid by the principal establishment, observing that their wages clearly attracted statutory deductions.
Case: Dr. Tripti Das & Anr. v. Dr. Phani Bhusan Mandal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 80
The Calcutta High Court has clarified that orders passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) cannot be routinely challenged through a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution when the dispute is purely between private parties, holding that the proper remedy in such cases lies under Article 227.
Justice Om Narayan Rai ruled that although NCDRC orders are amenable to High Court scrutiny, the nature of jurisdiction depends on the parties involved and the character of the dispute. Where no State authority or public law element is present, the Court said, Article 226 cannot be invoked merely because the order emanates from a statutory tribunal.
Case: Mamta Binani & Anr. v. Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 81
The Calcutta High Court has held that municipal authorities cannot retrospectively revalue property or saddle an auction purchaser with property tax dues relating to a period when the purchaser was not the owner, particularly when the property formed part of liquidation proceedings.
Allowing a writ petition against the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC), Justice Rai Chattopadhyay ruled that municipal dues constitute “operational debt” under the IBC and must be claimed before the liquidator and satisfied strictly in accordance with the waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the Code, and cannot be independently enforced against a subsequent purchaser.
Case Title: Abdul Rashid Khan v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Ciation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 82
The Calcutta High Court has reiterated that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued directing the police to register an FIR or initiate criminal proceedings, particularly in cases arising out of private land or property disputes, holding that aggrieved persons must first avail statutory remedies provided under criminal law before invoking writ jurisdiction.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen dismissed an intra-court appeal filed by Abdul Rashid Khan challenging the refusal of the Single Judge to direct police action on his complaint against private parties in a long-standing land dispute.
Case: In the matter of : Vijay Prakash Goel
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 83
The Calcutta High Court has granted bail to a senior citizen and licensed medical shop owner arrested under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act after recovery of codeine-based cough syrup and Tramadol capsules from his store, holding that mere seizure of such medicines, without material showing illegal procurement, illegal sale, or violation of any statutory ceiling on storage, is insufficient to justify continued detention under the stringent rigours of the NDPS law.
Case Title: The Chairman and Managing Director, Bank of Baroda & Ors. v. Sri Jyotirmoy Basu & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 84
Holding that mere recovery of bank stamps, blank passbooks and letterheads from an employee's residence, without proof of any actual prejudice to the bank, cannot amount to “acts prejudicial to the interest of the bank”, the Calcutta High Court dismissed an intra-court appeal filed by Bank of Baroda and upheld reinstatement of a dismissed workman with full back wages.
A Division Bench of Justice Lanusungkum Jamir and Justice Rai Chattopadhyay refused to interfere with a Single Judge's order which had set aside the Labour Tribunal's grant of lump-sum compensation and instead directed reinstatement with consequential benefits.
Case Title: Siddharth Sethia & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 85
Holding that the collapse of a joint real estate development arrangement cannot automatically attract criminal prosecution, the Calcutta High Court has ruled that disputes arising out of non-performance of contractual obligations are essentially civil in nature and cannot be given a “criminal colour” in the absence of dishonest intention from the very inception.
Observing that “to constitute cheating, there must be deception coupled with fraudulent or dishonest inducement at the inception of the transaction,” the Court cautioned that criminal law must not be used as a pressure tactic to settle commercial claims.
Case Title: M/s. Tata Capital Finance Ltd. & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 86
Observing that a dispute arising out of foreclosure charges and alleged excess recovery under a loan agreement is essentially contractual in nature and cannot be converted into a criminal prosecution for cheating or criminal breach of trust, the Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings initiated against Tata Capital Finance Ltd. and its officials. The Court held that even an alleged violation of regulatory or RBI guidelines would not, by itself, attract penal consequences under Sections 420 or 406 IPC in the absence of fraudulent intent or entrustment.
Case Title: Debanjan Hazra v. Serious Fraud Investigation Office & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 87
Refusing to interfere with a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued in connection with a large-scale corporate fraud investigation, the Calcutta High Court held that when an individual has permanently settled abroad, failed to respond to summons and there exists a real apprehension of evasion of prosecution, the investigating agency is justified in preventing departure from India. The Court observed that in such circumstances, the LOC cannot be termed arbitrary or illegal, particularly when “economic interests of India” are involved and prosecution under the Companies Act may soon follow.
Justice Krishna Rao dismissed a writ petition filed by Debanjan Hazra challenging an LOC issued by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) in the ongoing investigation into the affairs of Elder Pharmaceuticals Limited.
Case: Government of West Bengal v. Shiladitya Banerjee & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 88
The Calcutta High Court has held that a land acquisition award, which is treated as a decree by legal fiction, can be executed through multiple execution petitions until the entire decretal amount is realised, and that such execution proceedings are not barred by Section 38 of the Code of Civil Procedure since the award is not a decree actually passed by a civil court.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi dismissed an appeal filed by the Government of West Bengal challenging the maintainability of a second execution petition initiated by landowners to recover enhanced compensation arising out of acquisition proceedings.
Case Title: Bishnupada Choudhury & Ors. v. State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 89
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of several persons in a nearly four-decade-old culpable homicide case, holding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt as the evidence of related eyewitnesses was riddled with contradictions, their conduct appeared wholly unnatural, the very genesis of the FIR was doubtful, and the investigation suffered from serious lapses.
Case Name : Kalipada Majumdar & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 90
A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen held that movement from the post of Chowkidar/ General Mazdoor to Motor Pump Attendant (MPA)/Fitter General Mechanic (FGM) after clearing a trade test amounts to promotion and not reclassification, hence employees who have already been promoted are not entitled to benefits of second ACP.
Case: Raja Shah & Ors. v. Kowshik Show & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 91
The Calcutta High Court has reiterated that probate proceedings are concerned only with the genuineness of a will and not with the fairness of distribution among heirs, holding that mere delay in seeking probate or unequal bequests cannot, by themselves, amount to suspicious circumstances. Emphasising that courts must respect the last wishes of a testator once due execution and attestation are proved, the Court refused to interfere with a decree granting probate of a decades-old will.
Case: Tithi Adhikary v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 92
The Calcutta High Court has held that a purely contractual employee cannot claim continuation or renewal of service as a matter of right after expiry of the contractual term, and that a Minister cannot bypass statutory procedure to appoint an individual in the secretariat without a sanctioned post or recruitment process. Observing that such backdoor engagement amounts to misuse of public office and funds, the Court dismissed a writ petition seeking reinstatement.
Case: Eastern Coalfields Limited v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 93
Holding that an employer cannot defeat a dependent's claim for compassionate appointment by sitting over the matter for decades and then raising an age bar, the Calcutta High Court refused to interfere with an Industrial Tribunal award directing employment to the son of a deceased coal worker. The Court observed that keeping a dependent waiting for nearly 30 years without either granting or rejecting his claim was arbitrary and contrary to the duties of a “model employer”.
Case: Nirmal Chandra Biswas v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 94
The Calcutta High Court has held that recruiting authorities cannot introduce qualifying or cut-off marks for interview after commencement of the selection process, and once such illegality is struck down in respect of one candidate, other similarly placed candidates must ordinarily be granted the same benefit to avoid discrimination under Article 14.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Madhuresh Prasad and Justice Prasenjit Biswas directed the West Bengal Public Service Commission to recommend the petitioner's name for appointment to the post of Krishi Prayukti Sahayak, noting that he had secured higher aggregate marks than the last selected candidate in his category and was denied recommendation solely due to an illegally introduced interview cut-off.
Case: SUBRATA NUNDY VS. THE COLLECTOR OF KOLKATA, STAMP AND REVENUE, OFFICE OF THE COLLECTOR & ORS.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 95
The Calcutta High Court has held that a final decree passed in a partition suit, which conclusively determines the shares of the parties and incorporates a commissioner's partition plan, constitutes an “instrument of partition” under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and is therefore liable to stamp duty, even where physical division of the property by metes and bounds is not feasible. The Court clarified that stamp duty is attracted by the legal effect of the decree and not by the actual feasibility of physical partition.
Case: Smt. Swapna Bhattacharjee & Anr. VERSUS The New India Assurance Company Ltd. & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 96
The Calcutta High Court has enhanced the compensation awarded to the family of a bus accident victim, holding that while computing income for motor accident claims, only statutory deductions like income tax or professional tax can be excluded and not savings such as GPF or group insurance contributions. The Court observed that such contributions are deferred benefits payable back to the employee and therefore must form part of the deceased's income for determining “just compensation.”
Case: Rani Bibi Vs. Sk. Nurullah & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 97
The Calcutta High Court has held that a woman who takes refuge in a rented accommodation after being driven out of her matrimonial home can invoke the jurisdiction of the court within whose limits she is temporarily residing, and that continuing economic deprivation by the husband constitutes a recurring cause of action under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Setting aside a Sessions Court order that had returned the wife's complaint on territorial grounds, the Court emphasised that the DV Act is a beneficial legislation and must be interpreted liberally to advance remedies for aggrieved women rather than defeated on technicalities.
Case: Pushpa Sharma Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 98
Holding that the Maintenance Tribunal under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 has no jurisdiction to direct eviction of children from property in proceedings under Sections 4 and 5 of the Act, the Calcutta High Court has ruled that the Tribunal's powers are confined to granting monthly maintenance and cannot be stretched to order vacating of premises.
Justice Krishna Rao partly modified orders passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer (acting as the Maintenance Tribunal), setting aside the direction requiring a son to vacate his mother's house, while upholding the maintenance component. The Court also clarified that orders of the Maintenance Tribunal are amenable to challenge under Article 226 of the Constitution since the Tribunal performs quasi-judicial functions.
Case: Aimuddin Sheikh & Anr. Versus The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 99
The Calcutta High Court has converted the conviction of two brothers from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, holding that a fatal assault arising out of a sudden family quarrel over responsibility for maintaining aged parents lacked premeditation and therefore did not attract Section 302 of the IPC.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta partly allowed the appeal filed by Aimuddin Sheikh and another against their life sentence imposed by the trial court in Nadia.
Case: Ashok Tripathy -Vs- Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 100
Holding that the State cannot resurrect decades-old service decisions to penalise a blameless employee on the eve of retirement, the Calcutta High Court quashed a show-cause notice and recovery proceedings initiated against a Hindi Translator nearly 19 years after his financial upgradations and pay fixations had been repeatedly approved and acted upon.
Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay observed that “public administration is not a shifting desert where the sands of legality rearrange to suit administrative whims,” adding that when the State sleeps over its powers for decades, it forfeits the right to disturb the financial repose of an employee who neither misrepresented nor committed fraud. The Court emphasised that recovery of alleged excess payments after prolonged delay, particularly from a retired or soon-to-retire Group-C employee, is “iniquitous, arbitrary and constitutionally unconscionable.”
Case: Batliboi Environmental Engineering Limited Vs Eastern Metec Private Limited
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 101
Holding that the Code of Civil Procedure does not prohibit a defendant from filing an additional written statement or counterclaim with the leave of the court even after an earlier written statement has been submitted, the Calcutta High Court refused to interfere with an order of the Commercial Court accepting a fresh written statement along with a counterclaim after transfer of the suit.
Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) observed that subsequent pleadings are legally permissible under Order VIII Rules 6A, 8 and 9 of the CPC, and once the trial court grants leave, such filings cannot be termed illegal or without jurisdiction.
Case: National Insurance Co. Ltd. VERSUS Sandhya Keora And Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 102
Observing that families of accident victims are naturally preoccupied with treatment, death and last rites rather than immediately approaching the police, the Calcutta High Court held that mere delay in lodging an FIR cannot defeat a genuine motor accident compensation claim. The Court further ruled that an insurer cannot escape liability or seek “pay and recovery” unless it strictly proves breach of policy conditions after conducting a proper enquiry and giving the vehicle owner an opportunity of hearing.
Case: Arko Deep Saha @ Arkadeep Saha -Vs- State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 103
The Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a Skilled Technical Person implicated in an alleged MGNREGS fund misappropriation case, holding that “entrustment is the lifeblood of an offence under Section 409 IPC” and that criminal liability cannot be fastened merely on the basis of official designation without proof of dominion over funds or a document-linked overt act.
Case: Ashis Kumar Dutta & Anr. -Vs- State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 104
The Calcutta High Court has partly quashed criminal proceedings in a matrimonial cruelty case, drawing a clear line between specific allegations against a spouse and vague, omnibus accusations against extended family members, and reiterating that courts must prevent the criminal process from being used for “wholesale implication” of relatives.
Case: Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and another Vs. Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, Ministry of Labour & Employment Government of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 105
The Calcutta High Court has upheld an order of the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal setting aside provident fund dues assessed against a private company, ruling that trainee medical representatives engaged as apprentices under the Model Standing Orders cannot be treated as “employees” for the purpose of provident fund contributions under the EPF Act.
Justice Shampa Dutt dismissed a writ petition filed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and other EPFO authorities challenging the Tribunal's 2011 order in favour of M/s. Klar Sehen Pvt. Ltd., which had quashed a demand of ₹18.74 lakh raised under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Fund Organisation framework.
Case: Sanjay Agarwal & Ors. Vs. Rita Deb
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 106
The Calcutta High Court has upheld concurrent eviction decrees passed in favour of a landlord, reiterating that a registered ejectment notice returned with the postal endorsement “not claimed” amounts to valid service, and that a reasonably foreseeable future requirement of the landlord constitutes bona fide need under the rent control law.
Dismissing the second appeal, Justice Sugato Majumdar held that courts must assess the reasonableness of the claim and not insist on an immediate or existing necessity, observing that a genuine, foreseeable requirement cannot be defeated merely because it arises in the near future.
Case: AVIJIT SINGHA ROY VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 107
Observing that criminal law cannot be used as a pressure tactic in what is essentially a family property dispute, the Calcutta High Court has quashed defamation, insult and intimidation proceedings initiated against a private company executive, holding that the complaint did not disclose the basic ingredients of offences under the IPC.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das held that the allegations were vague, lacked particulars of date, time or specific words, and failed to establish any criminal intent.
Case: Ashis Kumar Kulovi -Vs- The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 108
Holding that sending a man to jail more than four decades after the alleged offence would serve no meaningful purpose, the Calcutta High Court released an Essential Commodities Act convict on probation while upholding his conviction.
Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay observed that requiring the appellant to undergo imprisonment at this stage, nearly 42 years after the incident, would not be “expedient in the interest of justice”, and that the ends of justice would be better served by extending the benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act.
Case: M/S. RAHAMAN CONSTRUCTION AND ANOTHER -VERSUS- THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 109
Observing that blacklisting of a contractor has serious civil consequences and must strictly follow the prescribed statutory procedure, the Calcutta High Court set aside a six-month debarment imposed by a Panchayat Samiti, holding that the action was taken in breach of both the Standard Bid Document and principles of natural justice.
Justice Kausik Chanda ruled that the multi-stage mechanism for debarment under West Bengal Form No. 2911 is “sequential and cannot be bypassed,” and that the Panchayat Samiti lacked jurisdiction to directly blacklist the contractor.
Case: CHANDRA DAS & ORS. VS KAMAL MITRA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 110
The Calcutta High Court has refused to grant probate of a 2001 Will in a contentious family dispute, holding that the propounder failed to prove its due execution in the manner mandated under Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act and Section 68 of the Evidence Act.
Delivering judgment in a testamentary suit, Justice Sugato Majumdar observed that when suspicious circumstances surround the execution of a Will, the burden on the propounder becomes heavier and must be discharged through clear, cogent and reliable evidence. The Court held that contradictory testimony of the sole attesting witness and failure to examine the second attesting witness were fatal to the probate claim.
Case: Gobinda Middya & Ors. Vs. Sudhir Kumar Dey & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 111
The Calcutta High Court has reaffirmed that debutter property vested in a deity enjoys strong legal protection and that a plea of adverse possession cannot succeed unless hostile title is clearly asserted against the deity as the true owner.
Dismissing a second appeal in a decades-old property dispute, Justice Sugato Majumdar held that permissive occupation of a tank dedicated to a deity could not ripen into ownership merely by long possession, particularly when the defendants failed to establish any overt act denying the deity's title.
Case: Baneshwar Mahato -Vs- Bishnupada Mahato & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 112
Holding that mere presence during a village scuffle cannot sustain a conviction for grievous hurt when the prosecution fails to clearly establish the specific overt act of the accused, the Calcutta High Court set aside the conviction of a man sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment for allegedly attacking a co-villager with a sharp weapon during a land dispute. Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay observed that the prosecution evidence suffered from material contradictions and absence of corroboration, entitling the accused to the benefit of doubt.
Case: Asit Barik Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 113
The Calcutta High Court has granted anticipatory bail to an accused in a CBI-probed murder arising out of the 2021 post-poll violence, holding that even in cases involving grave allegations, pre-arrest protection must be decided on the “nature and quality of evidence prima facie available” and not merely on the seriousness of the offence. Justice Jay Sengupta observed that courts must carefully assess whether the materials actually justify custodial interrogation at the stage of bail.
Case: BHARAT SONI & ORS. VS NANDINI SONI & ANR.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 114
Holding that mere omnibus allegations and belated medical certificates cannot justify subjecting distant in-laws to a serious charge of attempt to culpable homicide, the Calcutta High Court partly allowed a criminal revision and discharged the mother-in-law and sister-in-law of a woman from prosecution under Section 308 IPC in a matrimonial cruelty case.
Case: Ranajit Rakshit Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 115
The Calcutta High Court has held that once a competent authority concludes that a person does not belong to the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category, it is incumbent upon the authority to immediately proceed with the cancellation of the OBC certificate. The Court directed the Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO), Tamluk, to cancel the OBC certificate of an elected Gram Panchayat Pradhan within one week.
Case: Sudip Ranjan Dey VERSUS The Manager, Reliance General Insurance CO. LTD. & ANR.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 116
The Calcutta High Court has enhanced compensation to ₹6 lakh for a road accident victim who lost his right leg above the knee, holding that assessment of damages in motor accident claims cannot be confined to mere loss of employment and must account for lifelong disability, pain, future medical expenses, and loss of amenities.
Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury observed that “damages do not only mean pecuniary damage but also loss of amenity and disruption of normal functioning,” stressing that the right to move and work freely with a healthy body is a basic human right. The Court said a “narrow pedantic view” that denies enhanced compensation simply because the claimant retained his job would defeat the object of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Case: The State of West Bengal -Vs- Debabrata @ Bapi Goswami and Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 117
The Calcutta High Court has refused to interfere with a decades-old acquittal in a 1982 dacoity case, holding that serious lapses in identification, doubtful recovery of stolen articles, and contradictions in seizure evidence fatally weakened the prosecution case.
Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay, while dismissing the State's appeal, observed that the prosecution failed to conclusively establish ownership and recovery of the allegedly stolen wristwatch — the only incriminating material — and that witness testimony on identification of the accused was unreliable. The Court further noted that statements purportedly recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act were legally inadmissible as they amounted to confessional disclosures rather than discovery of facts.
Case: Manoj Kumar Chakraborty @ Kajal Chakraborty (Since Deceased) Represented By His Legal Heirs Smt. Pratima Chakraborty & Anr. VERSUS Ayakar Griha Nirman Samabay Samity Ltd. & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 118
The Calcutta High Court has held that the illness of a litigant coupled with laches on the part of the conducting advocate can constitute “sufficient cause” for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, and that such applications need only be decided on the touchstone of preponderance of probabilities.
Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury allowed a second appeal (SA 34 of 2019) filed by Manoj Kumar Chakraborty (since deceased, represented by legal heirs), setting aside the order of the First Appellate Court which had dismissed his appeal solely on the ground of delay.
Case: State of West Bengal and Others Vs. New Kenilworth Hotel Private Limited and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 119
The Calcutta High Court has held that the State cannot discriminate between private limited companies and public limited companies while granting exemption from excise licence fees for changes in management occurring in the usual course of business, observing that such unequal treatment violates Article 14 of the Constitution. The Court ruled that even though dealing in liquor is a State privilege, the distribution of that privilege and any exemptions attached to it must satisfy standards of fairness and non-arbitrariness.
Case: Gopal Banerjee & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 122
The Calcutta High Court has refused to interfere with a Magistrate's order rejecting discharge of two accused persons in a criminal case alleging forgery and cheating arising out of a land transaction, holding that at the stage of framing charge, the court is only required to assess whether prima facie materials disclose a “grave suspicion” and not conduct a mini-trial.
Dismissing the revision petition, Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee observed that where the materials on record indicate possible alteration or tampering of documents, the matter must proceed to trial.
Case Title: Innovatiview India Ltd. v. Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 123
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the eligibility criteria prescribed in a tender issued by the Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal, for providing a comprehensive surveillance and live web-streaming system for the 2026 Legislative Assembly elections, holding that courts cannot interfere with technical conditions of a tender unless they are demonstrably arbitrary, discriminatory, or mala fide.
Dismissing a writ petition filed by Innovatiview India Limited, Justice Krishna Rao observed that the formulation of experience requirements falls squarely within the policy domain of the tendering authority and judicial review cannot be invoked merely because a bidder finds the criteria restrictive or seeks relaxation.
Case: Dr. Santi Prasad Sinha Vs Union of India & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 124
Granting relief to a 74-year-old former education administrator arrested in connection with the alleged West Bengal school recruitment scam, the Calcutta High Court has held that prolonged incarceration without commencement of trial cannot be justified merely because the case is registered under the stringent provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
Observing that constitutional guarantees of personal liberty under Article 21 remain paramount, the bench of Justice Jay Sengupta reiterated that “jail is an exception and bail is the rule,” and that extended pre-trial custody may, in appropriate cases, dilute the rigours of Section 45 of the PMLA.
Case Title: Usha Martin Limited v. Balurghat Technologies Limited
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 125
The Calcutta High Court has held that there is no absolute bar on production of additional documents in commercial suits beyond the timelines prescribed under the CPC, and courts retain discretion to permit late disclosure at any stage — even when the matter has reached the argument stage — provided the party shows “reasonable cause” for earlier non-disclosure. The Court clarified that procedural timelines under Order XI Rule 1 are meant to ensure discipline in commercial litigation, but cannot be applied so rigidly as to defeat substantive justice.
Case: X v State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 126
The Calcutta High Court has cancelled the bail granted to an accused booked for aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a 14-year-old girl, holding that a trial court cannot grant liberty in serious POCSO cases merely because the chargesheet has been filed. Setting aside the order of the Sessions Court, Justice Bivas Pattanayak observed that bail discretion must be exercised judiciously after considering the gravity of allegations, the vulnerability of the child victim, and the likelihood of witness intimidation, and not “as a matter of course.”
Case: X v State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 127
The Calcutta High Court has held that while a fracture injury squarely falls within the definition of “grievous hurt” under the Indian Penal Code, an assault with a bamboo stick or rod cannot automatically attract the offence of causing grievous hurt by a “dangerous weapon” under Section 326 IPC. Modifying the conviction of six persons, the Court ruled that such objects are not inherently instruments “likely to cause death”, and therefore altered their conviction to Section 325 IPC and reduced the sentence.
Case: Swapan Kumar Ghosh -vs- The State of West Bengal & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 128
The Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a University of Calcutta professor accused of forgery and misappropriation of research project funds, holding that the materials collected during investigation raised only “suspicion” and not the “grave suspicion” necessary to put an accused to trial.
Allowing a criminal revision, Justice Tirthankar Ghosh ruled that continuation of the prosecution would amount to abuse of process, particularly when handwriting expert reports did not fix authorship of the disputed signatures and witnesses themselves attributed the cash withdrawals to another person.
Case Title: Purna Chandra Raul & Anr. v. State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 129
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of a husband in a decades-old dowry death case, holding that the prosecution failed to prove allegations of cruelty and abetment of suicide beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly in light of significant omissions in witness statements and unexplained delays in lodging the complaint.
Justice Prasenjit Biswas observed that the testimonies of the deceased woman's relatives suffered from material contradictions and improvements when compared with their statements during the investigation. The Court also found their conduct in not taking any immediate action despite allegedly knowing about repeated harassment to be “unnatural”.
The Calcutta High Court recently dismissed a writ petition challenging a fresh e-auction notice issued by the Murshidabad Zilla Parishad for the settlement of the Balia Shyampur Ferry Ghat, holding that no concluded contract had come into existence as the successful bidder failed to comply with a mandatory tender condition requiring submission of a bank guarantee.
Justice Kausik Chanda held that conditional acceptance of a bid does not result in a binding contract unless the bidder fulfils the stipulated conditions precedent. The Court further clarified that the extension of time to comply with such conditions cannot be construed as a waiver by the authority.
Case: DEEP DEY -VS- STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 130
The Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings alleging bigamy and matrimonial cruelty against a man after holding that a “marriage” based solely on signing a non-judicial stamp paper is not recognised under Hindu law and cannot form the foundation for prosecution under Sections 494 or 498A of the IPC.
Justice Uday Kumar observed that a contractual arrangement recorded on stamp paper cannot substitute the legally mandated rites and ceremonies required for solemnising a Hindu marriage. The Court held that such a “contractual marriage” is a legal nullity and lacks the essential elements required to create a legally valid marital relationship.
Case: BHARATI JANA -VS- STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 131
The Calcutta High Court has set aside a bail order passed by a Magistrate after finding that the order sheet bore only the initials of the presiding officer instead of a full and legible signature, holding that such authentication is contrary to the mandatory requirements governing the recording of judicial orders.
Justice Uday Kumar observed that a judicial order, being a public document, must carry the complete and legible signature of the presiding officer to ensure authenticity and transparency. The Court held that the use of mere initials on a bail order undermines the solemnity of judicial proceedings and violates Rule 183 of the Criminal Rules and Orders.
Case: Biswanath Mondal & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 132
The Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against two accused in a case involving allegations under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, holding that the dispute between the parties primarily arose out of a long-standing civil land dispute and appeared to have been given a colour of criminality as a retaliatory measure.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das observed that the materials on record indicated a chequered history of litigation between the neighbours relating to boundary and property disputes. The Court noted that the complainant had alleged caste-based humiliation and other offences after relations between the parties deteriorated over land issues and non-refund of money allegedly paid under an agreement.
Case: Union of India & Ors. Vs. Atul Kumar Sarkar & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 133
The Calcutta High Court has held that a member of the Railway Protection Force who seeks transfer on request or through mutual exchange loses seniority at the transferred place, but such transfer does not wipe out the employee's past service for determining eligibility for promotion.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Madhuresh Prasad and Justice Prasenjit Biswas dismissed an intra-court appeal filed by the Union of India and affirmed the order of the Single Judge allowing Sub-Inspectors to participate in the promotional process to the post of Inspector.
Case: Ram Chandra Pramanik v. State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 134
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the life imprisonment of a man convicted for murdering his pregnant wife, holding that the testimony of their minor son, who witnessed the crime, was trustworthy and remained unimpeached in cross-examination.
A division bench of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Rai Chattopadhyay dismissed the appeal filed by the accused and affirmed his conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Case: National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Shrabani Bhattacharyya & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 135
The Calcutta High Court has observed that delay in lodging an FIR in motor accident cases cannot be treated as fatal, noting that in Indian society the immediate priority of family members is to rush the injured to hospital rather than approach the police.
Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury made the observation while partly allowing an appeal filed by National Insurance Company Limited against a compensation award passed in favour of the family of a deceased accident victim.
Case: Pintu Mahata Vs. Swarnalata Mahata
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 137
The Calcutta High Court has held that reckless and unsubstantiated allegations made by a spouse against the other in pleadings, including accusations of illicit affairs and serious criminal acts without supporting evidence, amount to mental cruelty and can justify dissolution of marriage.
A Division Bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya made the observation while allowing an appeal filed by the husband and setting aside the trial court's decision, which had dismissed his divorce petition.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 138
The Calcutta High Court has held that while deciding an application for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the court can examine only the averments contained in the plaint and documents relied upon or annexed thereto, and cannot rely on extraneous materials produced by the defendant.
A Division Bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya allowed an appeal filed by the plaintiffs challenging an order of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Alipore, which had rejected their plaint in a suit seeking declaration of lawful possession and injunction over property at 24/7/1, Raja Santosh Road.
Case: Nirmal Mondal v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 139
The Calcutta High Court recently held that once land is acquired and vests in the State free from all encumbrances, it cannot be returned to the erstwhile owners or subsequent purchasers even if the land remains unutilised.
The Court also reiterated that subsequent purchasers have no right to challenge land acquisition proceedings and mutation entries in revenue records do not confer ownership.
Case: Transportation, Planning and Traffic Engineering Directorate, Government of West Bengal, Transport Department Vs. M/s. Maharshi Commerce Limited and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 140
The Calcutta High Court has held that the State cannot continue to occupy private property once the lease has expired and the requisition order has been quashed, observing that such continued occupation would amount to an illegal deprivation of property.
The Court further imposed personal costs of ₹50,000 on the Director of the concerned State Directorate for resisting compliance with earlier court orders.
Case: Rakesh Kumar Singh v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 141
The Calcutta High Court held that a person cannot be taken into custody merely for alleged breach of an interim bond for good behaviour executed during preventive proceedings, clarifying that detention under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is permissible only when there is a breach of a final bond ordered after completion of the statutory inquiry. Justice Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee made this observation while setting aside an order of an Executive Magistrate that had cancelled the petitioner's interim bond and directed his detention during the pendency of preventive proceedings.
Case No: Death Reference No. 8 of 2025
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 142
The Calcutta High Court refused to confirm the death sentence imposed on a man convicted of murdering a political worker and ultimately set aside both the conviction and sentence, citing serious evidentiary gaps, investigative lapses, and fundamental errors in the trial court's appreciation of evidence.
A Division Bench of Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Apurba Sinha Ray was dealing with a death reference and a connected criminal appeal filed by the convict Baladeb Paul, who had been sentenced to death by a Sessions Court for allegedly shooting Naimuddin Khan during a clash on the day nomination papers were being filed in a local election in 2011.
Case: Pankaj Kumar Vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 143
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the conviction and sentences awarded to three men for the rape of a minor girl on a moving train, holding that the prosecution had proved the charges beyond a reasonable doubt through consistent victim testimony, medical evidence, and corroborating circumstances.
A Division Bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi dismissed three criminal appeals filed by the convicts challenging the judgment of the Special POCSO Court, Howrah.
Case: ATIN KUMAR BANDOPADHYAY VERSUS HOWRAH MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 144
The Calcutta High Court has held that municipal authorities cannot impose building-sanction conditions that lack statutory backing merely on the basis of security concerns raised by police authorities regarding nearby sensitive installations. The Court observed that allowing such conditions would permit executive authorities to override the statutory scheme governing building regulation.
Justice Gaurang Kanth was dealing with petitions filed by a property owner and developer challenging certain conditions imposed while granting sanction for construction of a G+4 residential building near the State Secretariat, Nabanna, which falls within a notified “security zone.” The proposed structure had a height of 15.49 metres, which was within the 15.5-metre limit prescribed under the Howrah Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 for construction within 500 metres of a notified security installation.
Case: ANJALI PANJA & ORS VS SATYABALA DAS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 145
The Calcutta High Court allowed a second appeal and restored a trial court decree for eviction, holding that a landlord's requirement to construct a toilet in premises lacking such basic facility constitutes a bona fide and reasonable requirement under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. The judgment was delivered by Justice Sugato Majumdar.
The plaintiffs had filed a suit seeking eviction of the defendant from a room in the 'Gha-1' portion of the property in order to convert it into a toilet for tenants residing in the premises. According to the plaintiffs, the relevant portion of the property had no toilet or latrine, forcing tenants to use facilities located in another property. The trial court found merit in this claim and decreed eviction, observing that the premises were reasonably required for construction of a bathroom.
Case: Sanchita Sen Majumdar & Anr. VERSUS Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 146
The Calcutta High Court enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim case filed by parents who lost their two sons in a road accident, holding that the notional income of a deceased student should not be assessed merely on the basis of his temporary earnings during student life but must also reflect his future earning prospects.
A Single Bench of Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury was hearing two connected appeals filed by the parents challenging the awards passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in separate claim cases arising out of the death of their sons in a 2015 road accident involving a gas tanker insured by Oriental Insurance Company Limited. The parents contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was inadequate, particularly because the future prospects of the deceased students had not been properly considered.
Case: XXX Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 147
The Calcutta High Court directed a fresh probe by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the alleged kidnapping, rape and murder of a 13-year-old girl in Murshidabad, observing that the investigation conducted so far suffered from serious lacunae and failed to inspire confidence.
A Single Bench of Justice Jay Sengupta was hearing a revision petition filed by the victim's mother seeking further investigation or reinvestigation in a case registered under Sections 363, 302, 34 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
Case: Md. Abdul Mottalab Mia @ Abdul Mottalab Vs. The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 148
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the conviction and life sentence of a man for murdering a woman with whom he was living, holding that the chain of circumstantial evidence, including the “last seen” theory and the accused's conduct after the incident, clearly established his guilt.
A Division Bench of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Rai Chattopadhyay dismissed an appeal filed by Md. Abdul Mottalab Mia, challenging a 2014 judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Alipurduar, which had convicted him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to life imprisonment.
Case: Kader Mia Vs. The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 149
The Calcutta High Court has acquitted a man convicted of murdering his wife, holding that a dying declaration surrounded by suspicious circumstances cannot form the sole basis of conviction.
A Division Bench of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Rai Chattopadhyay set aside the 2015 trial court judgment which had sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC, observing that the prosecution case had collapsed and the evidence on record failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Service Of Showcause Notice Via Email Valid Under PMLA Regulations: Calcutta High Court
Case: Dipak De Vs. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 150
The Calcutta High Court has held that in proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), the issue of whether all “relied upon documents” (RUDs) have been duly supplied to the noticee must be determined by the Adjudicating Authority at the threshold, before proceeding further with the case. Deciding a writ petition filed by Dipak De, Justice Krishna Rao declined to quash the show cause notice issued under Section 8(1) PMLA, but issued directions to ensure compliance with procedural safeguards relating to supply of documents.
Case No: CRM (R) 20 of 2025
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 151
The Calcutta High Court has granted bail to an accused in a money laundering case, holding that prolonged pre-trial incarceration of over three years violates the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 and can justify relaxation of the stringent twin conditions under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Justice Suvra Ghosh observed that howsoever stringent a penal statute may be, a constitutional court must lean in favour of constitutionalism and the rule of law, of which liberty is an intrinsic part.
Case: Sandip Kumar Roy Vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 152
The Calcutta High Court has refused to quash corruption proceedings against a Deputy Excise Collector accused in a trap case, holding that the existence of prima facie material showing demand and handling of tainted money must be tested at trial.
Justice Apurba Sinha Ray dismissed a criminal revision filed under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceedings under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner, a West Bengal Civil Services officer, had been arrested by the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) in 2016 following allegations that he demanded illegal gratification for facilitating an excise licence.
Case: Kaushik Panja & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 153
The Calcutta High Court has held that under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, a Magistrate cannot direct the police to conduct an “inquiry” and must himself undertake such inquiry before ordering investigation.
Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee clarified that the statutory scheme mandates application of judicial mind, and the expression “inquiry” as defined under the BNSS refers to an exercise to be carried out by a Magistrate or Court, not by the police. Delegating this function to the police—particularly when they have already refused to register an FIR—would be contrary to legislative intent and amount to an abuse of process.
Case: M/s Innovatiview India Limited vs. The Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal, Election Commission of India and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 154
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the tender conditions for providing a surveillance and live web-streaming system for the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections, reiterating that courts should exercise minimal interference in contractual matters unless the conditions are shown to be arbitrary, discriminatory, or mala fide.
Dismissing an appeal filed by M/s Innovatiview India Limited, a Division Bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar and Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta held that the eligibility criteria prescribed in the Request for Proposal (RFP) had a direct nexus with the scale and nature of the work and could not be termed irrational or anti-competitive.
Case: Burn Standard Ex-Employees' Welfare Association & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 155
The Calcutta High Court has held that employees who accepted voluntary retirement cannot be denied the benefit of a retrospective pay revision that accrued during their service, observing that such benefits constitute a vested right which survives retirement. Deciding writ petitions filed by ex-employees of Burn Standard Company Limited, Justice Rai Chattopadhyay ruled that once a pay revision is made effective from a date when employees were still in service, the financial benefits flowing from such revision cannot be withheld merely because they later opted for Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS).
Case: Palas Dolui @ Tanai -Versus- The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 156
The Calcutta High Court upheld the conviction of an accused for causing grievous hurt under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code, but reduced the sentence to the period already undergone, citing inordinate delay of nearly 17 years in the conclusion of proceedings and prolonged pendency of the appeal.
The appeal arose from a 2010 judgment of a Sessions Court in Howrah convicting the appellant for assaulting his neighbour's daughter-in-law with an iron rod (“sabal”), causing grievous head injuries. The Trial Court had sentenced him to one year's rigorous imprisonment along with a fine.
Case: Arka Kumar Nag v Election Commission Of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 157
The Calcutta High Court on Monday heard a petition challenging the Election Commission of India's “unprecedented” transfer of senior bureaucrats in West Bengal following the enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) ahead of Assembly elections.
Senior Advocate Kalyan Bandopadhyay, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the election notification was issued on March 15 at 3 PM, but “at 3 AM the Chief Secretary and Principal Secretary were transferred, then the DGP was transferred,” followed by a series of transfers of District Magistrates, Superintendents of Police and Commissioners of Police.
Case: Vishva Hindu Parishad & Another –Versus – State of West Bengal & Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 158
The Calcutta High Court has permitted the Vishva Hindu Parishad to organise a Ram Navami rally in Howrah on March 26, 2026, allowing it to follow the same route as the previous year, while imposing a series of restrictions to ensure maintenance of public order.
Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya was hearing a writ petition filed by the Vishva Hindu Parishad seeking directions upon police authorities to facilitate the rally.
Case: Tanushri Mondal and Others Versus The State of West Bengal and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 159
The Calcutta High Court has held that a mid-session fee hike cannot be imposed on students who had already taken admission on the basis of a previously notified fee structure.
A Division Bench of Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Supratim Bhattacharya, while hearing three connected appeals filed by first-year B.Tech students of Dr. B.C. Roy Engineering College, set aside the college's direction demanding enhanced fees from the January 2024 semester onwards. The Bench found that the State's Notification dated 16 October 2023—which revised the fee ceiling for private engineering colleges—could not be applied to students who had already completed the admission process, paid fees and commenced classes for the 2023–27 academic session.
Right To Adopt Cannot Be Defeated By Procedural Delay: Calcutta High Court
Case: Jagannath Guha Vs Manju Guha (Paul) and Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 160
The Calcutta High Court has held that a prospective adoptive parent cannot be deprived of the right to adopt merely because the child crosses the statutory age limit during pendency of court proceedings, particularly when the delay is attributable to the judicial process itself. Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), allowing a civil revision petition, set aside an order of the District Judge, Nadia, which had rejected an adoption application under Section 11 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA) on the ground that the boy—who was 13 years and 11 months old on the date of filing—had turned 16 by the time the order was pronounced.
Case: SAHUJAIN CHARITABLE SOCIETY AND ANR. VERSUS THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 161
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Section 3 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 2022, which expanded and retrospectively validated the Corporation's power to revise annual property valuation.
Justice Gaurang Kanth held that the amendment—introduced to cure defects noticed in earlier litigation—falls squarely within the State Legislature's competence and does not amount to an impermissible legislative override of judicial decisions.
Case: CESC Limited Versus 3 Cheers Entertainments Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 162
The Calcutta High Court has accepted unconditional apologies from the makers and anchor of the investigative TV show Khoj Khabar in a 22-year-old defamation suit filed by CESC Limited, imposing only token damages and costs. The Court, presided over by Justice Krishna Rao, noted that the 2004 broadcasts had used highly inflammatory language—branding CESC as indulging in “mafiagiri”, “gundami”, “zulum bazi”, and calling it a “Tughlaqui company” and “big thief”. The programme had gone further by portraying CESC employees as devils in cartoon form, even placing them against the backdrop of Osama bin Laden and other terrorists, which the Court described as defamatory, abusive and a deliberate misrepresentation.
Case: Ashok Kumar Kundu Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 163
The Calcutta High Court's Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri has refused to overturn the 2019 acquittal of two men accused of abetting the suicide of a Jalpaiguri resident, holding that the prosecution failed to establish any proximate act of instigation, intentional aid, or continuous conduct linking the accused to the victim's death. The Court reiterated that past threats or strained relations, without a direct and immediate nexus to the suicide, cannot sustain a conviction under Section 306 IPC.
Case: NIREN BARMAN VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 164
"When the incident is alleged to have occurred on a public road during school hours, the absence of a single independent witness casts grave doubt on the prosecution case,” the Calcutta High Court observed while setting aside a conviction under Section 4 of the POCSO Act.
The Jalpaiguri Circuit Bench acquitted a man sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, holding that the prosecution failed to establish the charge of rape beyond reasonable doubt.
Case: Mangru Ratia vs. The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 165
The Calcutta High Court's Jalpaiguri Circuit Bench has upheld the conviction and life sentence of a man found guilty of murdering his wife inside their matrimonial home, stressing that his complete failure to explain the circumstances of her death was a decisive factor in affirming guilt. The Division Bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury noted that the incident occurred in the kitchen of the house at dawn, a place and time where the husband was admittedly present, thereby attracting the presumption under Section 106 of the Evidence Act.
Case: Abhishek Maity Vs. The West Bengal State University & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 166
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by Abhishek Maity seeking a direction upon West Bengal State University to treat a purported 2014 post-review marksheet as genuine and to issue him a pass certificate accordingly.
A Division Bench of Justices Tapabrata Chakraborty and Partha Sarathi Chatterjee upheld the Single Judge's refusal, holding that the marks claimed by the appellant do not match the University's official database and that the document relied upon appears to be a forged marksheet issued during the period when a racket operated within the University.
Case: Ajay Kumar Vs. The State of West Bengal and another
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 167
The Calcutta High Court, sitting at the Jalpaiguri Circuit Bench, has quashed criminal proceedings arising out of allegations of bigamy under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), after noting that the dispute between the parties had been fully settled and that one of the offences invoked could not have been prosecuted through a police case at all. Justice Jay Sengupta passed the order while allowing a criminal revision petition filed by Ajay Kumar, against whom a case had been registered under Sections 82(2) and 85 of the BNS.
Case: Gautam Das Vs. The High Powered Election Committee, 12th Bar Council of West Bengal Election, 2026 & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 168
“An advocate may be a member of several Bar Associations, but can cast only one vote. The admitted irregularity of duplicate and cross-district voter entries is unthinkable and strikes at the foundation of a free, fair, transparent election,” the Calcutta High Court held while intervening in the final electoral roll for the Jalpaiguri Bar Association booth in the 12th West Bengal Bar Council election.
Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), sitting at the Jalaiguri circuit bench, observed that the inclusion of advocates from Bar Associations in Murshidabad and Siliguri within the Jalpaiguri booth list, along with the presence of duplicate entries, amounted to a direct threat to the fairness and transparency of the election. The Court emphasised that, although an advocate may be a member of several Bar Associations, he or she can cast only one vote. The presence of duplicate and cross-district entries, therefore, created a possibility of multiple voting, which the Court described as “unthinkable” in any regulated electoral exercise.
Case: MITHUN PAUL VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 169
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of a man found guilty of rape in 2008, holding that the prosecution's case suffered from contradictions, material omissions and lack of corroboration — especially the complainant's admission that she subsequently married the accused and lived with him as his wife.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das, deciding the criminal appeal in CRA 76 of 2009 (Mithun Paul v. State of West Bengal), observed that the written complaint itself concealed the fact of marriage, which emerged only during trial, raising serious doubts about the genuineness of the allegations.
Case: BOREN MONDAL VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 170
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of a man under Section 498A of the IPC, holding that the prosecution failed to prove any act of cruelty or dowry-related harassment that could have driven his wife to commit suicide.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das observed that the evidence on record was marked by vague allegations, contradictions and emotional assertions, and that the prosecution story lacked the foundational facts necessary to sustain a conviction for cruelty. The Court noted that the mother of the deceased herself admitted in her testimony that she had lodged the complaint “out of grudge” after her daughter's death, and that the alleged dying declaration was non-existent, as the victim was only heard saying that she “would die”.
Case title: Arka Kumar Nag v/s Election Commission of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 171
The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday (March 31) dismissed a petition challenging the Election Commission of India's “unprecedented” transfer of senior bureaucrats in West Bengal following the enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) ahead of Assembly elections.
A division bench of Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen pronounced the order.
ECI Not Targetting Bengal, More Officers Transferred In Other Poll-Bound States: Calcutta High Court
Case: Arka Kumar Nag vs. Election Commission of India and others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 172
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation filed by Advocate Arka Kumar Nag challenging the Election Commission of India's large-scale transfers of IAS and IPS officers following the March 15 election announcement, holding that the challenge was fundamentally flawed because the “existence of power with ECI to transfer/shift the officers after issuance of election notification to ensure free and fair election” was never disputed in the petition itself.
Case: Eastern Coalfields Limited & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 173
The Calcutta High Court has held that an employer is entitled to deduct penal rent and other dues from the gratuity of a retired employee who continues to occupy company accommodation unlawfully.
Setting aside concurrent orders passed by the Controlling and Appellate Authorities under the Payment of Gratuity Act, Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) observed that permitting such conduct would encourage others to illegally retain official quarters, ultimately depriving serving employees of essential housing facilities.
Case: Santosh Sardar Vs. Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 174
The Calcutta High Court has refused to grant relief to a BSF constable who was dismissed from service for having secured his appointment on the basis of forged secondary examination documents. Justice Amrita Sinha held that once fraud at the entry stage is established, the very foundation of service becomes illegal, and no amount of sympathy based on long years of service can cure the defect. The Court stressed that an employee who does not possess the minimum educational qualification cannot be retained in service simply because he has served for decades. Such retention, the judge said, would undermine discipline and demoralise the force.
Case: Aasif Mohammad @ Asif Mohammad @ Asif @ Viki Versus The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 175
The Calcutta High Court has quashed an NDPS prosecution against a Meerut resident accused of masterminding a large phensedyl trafficking operation, holding that the case against him was built solely on co-accused confessions that are “inadmissible” and unsupported by any independent material.
Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta held that compelling the petitioner to face trial in the absence of even a shred of admissible evidence would amount to a “miscarriage of justice”.
Case: SK.SAMAD VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 176
The Calcutta High Court has overturned a 2007 conviction for kidnapping of a minor girl, holding that the prosecution failed to prove that the girl had been taken away from the “lawful guardianship” of the woman with whom she was residing as a 'maidservant.'
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das, while allowing the appeal, emphasised that the prosecution's case suffered from contradictions, unreliable testimony, and an entirely unstable foundation regarding who the lawful guardian actually was. The Court observed that the trial court had already acquitted the accused of the graver charge under Section 373 IPC, and even the remaining conviction under Section 363 could not be sustained.
Case: IDEL SK @ GABA SK AND ANOTHER -VS- STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 177
The Calcutta High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against two timber merchants accused of trespass, theft of nearly one thousand trees and caste-based abuse of a Santhal woman, holding that the allegations disclose prima facie offences under both the IPC and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and must proceed to trial.
Justice Uday Kumar ruled that the sheer scale of the alleged tree-felling operation—carried out over three days with labourers, machinery and transport vehicles—makes the location “a place within public view” for the purposes of the SC/ST Act.
Case: SARANJIT KAUR (HURA) -versus- INDER SINGH HURA
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 178
The Calcutta High Court bench of Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Supratim Bhattacharya dismissed an appeal filed by the wife challenging the husband's divorce decree. The Trial Court had granted a divorce on the ground of cruelty, while also taking note of the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.
The Division Bench upheld these findings after examining the evidence led by both sides, the wife's conduct before and after the institution of the suit, the criminal proceedings initiated by her, and the prolonged separation of nearly 17 years.
Case: RAMLAL -VS- STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 179
The Calcutta High Court has quashed the NDPS proceedings against a petitioner who was implicated five years after a 2012 Charas seizure, holding that the prosecution sought to proceed solely on the strength of inadmissible Section 67 NDPS Act statements.
Justice Uday Kumar noted at the outset that after Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu, confessions recorded by investigating officers under Section 67 have no evidentiary value and cannot form the foundation of prosecution. Once these statements were excluded from consideration, the case, the Court said, was left without “a single legally admissible material” connecting the petitioner to the alleged narcotics transaction.
Case: M/s. Sewak Enterprise Vs. The Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 180
The Calcutta High Court on March 30, 2026, set aside a show-cause notice and a subsequent termination order issued against M/s Sewak Enterprises, holding that the authorities acted arbitrarily and in complete disregard of documents already submitted by the petitioner.
Justice Krishna Rao observed that the impugned actions were issued “without any application of mind,” as the records clearly demonstrated that the vehicle's ownership transfer and the PESO licence transfer had been completed within the four-month deadline stipulated in the tender conditions, and the relevant documents had been emailed to the authorities well before the issuance of the show-cause notice.
Case: Md. Farhad Zaman Vs. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal)181
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the dismissal of BSF personnel Md. Farhad Zaman, accused of accepting bribes to secure “fit” medical certificates for job aspirants appearing in the 2018 Constable (GD) recruitment in CAPFs, NIA, SSF and Assam Rifles.
Justice Amrita Sinha dismissed the writ petition filed by the dismissed BSF constable and observed that overwhelming material existed to prima facie indicate his involvement in a conspiracy involving doctors and civilians.
Case: MRIGESH KANTI NATH & ORS. VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 182
“To allow such proceedings to continue would be a sheer abuse of the process of the court,” the Calcutta High Court observed while quashing criminal proceedings under inter alia Sections 498A IPC, and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against a 67-year-old father-in-law and 61-year-old mother-in-law.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das allowed a criminal revision petition filed by Mrigesh Kanti Nath and another, holding that the allegations made by the complainant-wife were general, non-specific, uncorroborated and directly inconsistent with the medical incapacity of the in-laws, who had undergone major surgeries during the period of the alleged assaults.
Case: GUNADHAR KOLEY vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 183
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of two brothers, Naba Kumar Koley and Gunadhar Koley, who had been found guilty under Sections 307 and 324 of the IPC for allegedly assaulting their sibling Balai Koley over a dispute relating to Til plants.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das), delivering judgment on April 8, 2026, held that the prosecution's case was riddled with “glaring inconsistencies” and suffered from a completely unreliable evidentiary foundation. The Court observed that the entire episode arose from a long-standing and deeply strained family relationship, marked by not only property disputes but also political rivalries and marital discord within the household, which had split the family into two hostile groups long before the incident.
Case: Uma Sengupta & Ors v/s. The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 184
The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday reiterated that the Right to Information is a fundamental right flowing from Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, and directed the State Public Information Officer of the West Bengal Information Commission to dispose of a pending RTI request within 15 days.
Justice Rai Chattopadhyay was hearing a petition challenging the non-supply of information sought in 2018 and the subsequent handling of the RTI proceedings by the State Information Commission.
Case Name : Smt. Ranu Chatterjee & ors. vs. State of West Bengal & ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 185
A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee and Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty held that the brother of a deceased government teacher does not qualify as “family” under Clause 5(s)(2) of the Pension Scheme, 1981, and he cannot claim family pension arrears, especially when the original beneficiary (mother) never claimed the benefit during her lifetime.
Case: Rupa Banerjee Nee Samjpati v. The Election Commission of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 186
The Calcutta High Court on Friday sharply criticised the Election Commission of India (ECI) for appointing Assistant Professors and Associate Professors from government colleges as Presiding Officers for the upcoming West Bengal Assembly Elections without recording any “unavoidable circumstances” as mandated under earlier Commission instructions.
Justice Krishna Rao, while allowing a writ petition filed by a society representing college teachers, held that the ECI had acted in violation of its own circular dated February 16/17, 2010, which stated that Group A equivalent senior officers, including university and college teaching staff, should not ordinarily be deployed for polling duties inside polling stations unless specific reasons were recorded in writing by the District Election Officer.
Case Title: Sangita Raha & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 187
The Calcutta High Court has directed the West Bengal government to issue an eligibility certificate under the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 to a married couple who crossed the statutory age limit after initiating fertility treatment, holding that they should not be denied parenthood after already undergoing the Assisted Reproductive Technology process and successfully cryopreserving embryos.
Case Title: The State of West Bengal v. Gopal Das
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 188
The Calcutta High Court has acquitted a man who had been sentenced to death for allegedly murdering his wife and concealing her body in a septic tank, holding that the prosecution utterly failed to establish an unbroken chain of circumstances and that the trial court had proceeded with a “pre-determined mind” by attempting to make the facts fit the prosecution's story.
Case Name : Sk. Golam Kibria Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 189
A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising Justice Shampa Sarkar and Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta held that an employee is not entitled to pension under the West Bengal Municipal (Employees' Death cum Retirement Benefits) Rules, 2003 if the municipality had already adopted the Model Pension Rules (1984), and the employee failed to exercise the mandatory option to come under the pension scheme.
Case: Md Danish Farooqi v Election Commission of India
Citation: 2026 Livelaw (Cal) 190
The Calcutta High Court has stayed a controversial communication issued from the office of the Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal, which allegedly identified around 800 persons as “trouble-makers” and called for action against them ahead of the Assembly elections, observing prima facie that the Election Commission cannot issue such “blanket direction” when election offences are already governed by statute.
Case: Overseas Scrap Trading Corporation vs. Howrah Municipal Corporation and Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 191
The Calcutta High Court has held that the Howrah Municipal Corporation (HMC) cannot indefinitely withhold execution of sale deeds in favour of a successful auction purchaser on the pretext of pending State approval, when the governing statute itself authorises the Corporation to dispose of its property.
Justice Shampa Sarkar directed the State Government to grant the necessary approval within eight weeks and ordered HMC to execute the conveyance deeds within four weeks thereafter. The Court further clarified that if approval was not granted within the stipulated period, HMC would proceed with the execution of the deeds without any further reference to the State Government.
Case Title: Avvya Todi v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 192
The Calcutta High Court has refused to grant interim relief to a 16-year-old student seeking permission to sit for internal examinations after being expelled by a private school over allegations of bullying, while holding that the writ petition challenging the disciplinary action is maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Justice Reetobroto Kumar Mitra observed that any immediate direction permitting the student to appear in the examinations would effectively keep the expulsion order in abeyance without the Court even examining that order, which had not yet been placed on record.
WB Polls: Calcutta High Court Quashes Requisition Of School's Buses For Election Duty
Case Title: South Point Education Society & Anr. vs State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 196
The Calcutta High Court has quashed the requisition of eight school buses belonging to South Point, for West Bengal Assembly election duty, holding that the police and transport authorities acted without jurisdiction and failed to show any prior approval from the competent election authorities.
Justice Krishna Rao observed that although Section 160 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, empowers the government to requisition vehicles for elections, such power cannot be exercised arbitrarily or without following due process of law.
Case: Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal Vs. Ritankar Das & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 197
The Calcutta High Court has modified a single bench order, which removed all restrictions imposed by the Election Commission of India on bike riding, bike rallies and pillion riding ahead of the second phase of the West Bengal polls to be held on 29th April.
Challenging the order, the ECI approached a division bench consisting of Justices Shampa Sarkar and Ajay Kumar Gupta.
The Bench observed that after hearing submissions on the need to ensure security and peaceful polling during the second phase, the earlier order required limited modification in the larger interest of free and fair elections.
Case: Muddassir Ahmed Siddique Vs. The Election Commission of India & Ors. and connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 198
The Calcutta High Court has requested the SIR Appellate Tribunal to consider and dispose of a bunch of appeals filed by voters whose names were allegedly deleted from the electoral roll, observing that an early decision would enable the petitioner to exercise his franchise in the upcoming poll scheduled for April 29, 2026.
Justice Krishna Rao was hearing writ petitions filed by individuals who complained that although his name initially appeared in the voter list, it was subsequently removed.
Case Title: Rahul Verma v. State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 199
The Calcutta High Court has refused anticipatory bail to an accused in a massive cyber fraud case allegedly involving fake investment schemes, digital arrest scams and proceeds of crime running into thousands of crores, observing that he was “practically caught red-handed while perpetrating the alleged fraud.”
Justice Jay Sengupta held that the petitioner could not claim parity with members of the Ruia family, who had earlier been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench, since the allegations against him were qualitatively different.
Case Title: Md. Danish Farooqui v. Election Commission of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 200
The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday disposed of a public interest litigation challenging a memo issued by the office of the Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal, which had directed preventive action against persons allegedly involved in voter intimidation ahead of the Assembly elections.
A Division Bench of Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen noted that the impugned memo dated April 27, 2026 had already been withdrawn by the Election Commission of India (ECI), rendering the matter substantially infructuous.
Case Title: Sajal Maji v. The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 201
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the conviction and 10-year sentence of a man found guilty of hurling a bomb at another person during Panchayat election campaigning in Birbhum, observing that any reasonable person throwing a bomb at someone must be presumed to know that such an act is likely to cause death.
A Division Bench of Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Apurba Sinha Ray dismissed the appeal filed by Sajal Maji against his conviction under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 9B(2) of the Indian Explosives Act.
Case Title: Sudip Kumar Pal v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 202
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the dismissal of a Border Security Force (BSF) constable for repeatedly overstaying leave and remaining absent without authorization, observing that a disciplined force cannot tolerate members who “drop in and absent” themselves at will.
Justice Amrita Sinha dismissed the writ petition filed by Sudip Kumar Pal challenging his dismissal from service and the appellate order affirming it.
Case: All India Trinamool Congress Vs. Election Commission of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 203
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed an interlocutory application filed by the All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) challenging the exclusion of State government or state PSU employees from being appointed as counting supervisors or counting assistants for the ongoing West Bengal Assembly elections, 2026.
"It is the prerogative of the office of the Election Commission of India to appoint the counting supervisor and counting assistant either from the State Government or the Central Government. This Court does not find any illegality for appointing counting supervisor and counting assistant from the Central Government/Central PSU employee instead of State Government employee," the Court stated.
Case: Saw Herald vs The State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 204
The Calcutta High Court has granted bail to an accused in an NDPS case, holding that mere driving of a vehicle from which contraband is recovered, without any recovery from the accused or prima facie material showing control over the seized substance, does not amount to “possession” so as to attract the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya sitting at the Port Blair circuit bench observed that although the concept of possession under the Act is not confined to physical recovery from the person of the accused, there must at least be prima facie material indicating that the accused had control over the contraband, and merely driving a car from which recovery is made from a passenger does not satisfy this requirement.
Case Title: Saw Timothy v. State and Another
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 205
The Calcutta High Court has cautioned the State authorities against delaying the release of accused persons despite the grant of bail, observing that such conduct undermines personal liberty.
A Division Bench of Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Smita Das De was dealing with a habeas corpus plea alleging continued detention despite bail.
Recording a strong word of caution, the Court observed: : “On every occasion when an accused obtains bail, he/she should be immediately released and cannot be compelled to come to Court every time by filing Habeas Corpus petitions.”
Case: Augustine Ballava vs State
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 206
The Calcutta High Court (Circuit Bench at Port Blair) has granted bail to a 52-year-old cultivator accused of cultivating cannabis plants, holding that the stringent conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted to offences under Section 20(a) in the absence of any commercial quantity. Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, while allowing the bail application, observed that the statutory rigours imposing a reverse burden and stricter standards for bail would not apply in such cases.
Case: Arindam Ghosh Vs. The Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 207
The Calcutta High Court has refused to interfere with the acceptance of a candidate's nomination during the ongoing election process, holding that such disputes must be agitated through an election petition after the polls.
Disposing of a writ petition filed by an independent candidate from the 117–Rajarhat Gopalpur Assembly Constituency, Justice Krishna Rao observed that “if any order is passed, the same will amount to interference with the election process,” and therefore declined to exercise writ jurisdiction at this stage.
Case: The Lieutenant Governor & Ors. v. Dharam Raj
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 208
The Calcutta High Court has held that an appointing authority is not precluded from imposing the penalty of dismissal merely because it also functions as the appellate authority, so long as a higher forum of appeal is available in the administrative hierarchy. Setting aside an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, the Division Bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Smita Das De restored the dismissal of a government employee, observing that the Tribunal had erred in law despite upholding the findings on merits.
“Cannot Maintain Double Standards”: Calcutta HC Pulls Up Centre For Selective Compliance Of Court Order Over Andaman DRMs Regularisation Row
Case: Case: Union of India & Ors. v. Andaman Sarvajanik Nirman Vibhag Mazdoor Sangh & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 209
The Calcutta High Court has held that the Union Government cannot selectively comply with a binding judicial decision by implementing one part of it while resisting the rest on the ground of “policy,” in a case concerning regularisation of Daily Rated Mazdoors (DRMs) in the Andaman & Nicobar Islands.
Deciding an appeal in Union of India & Ors. v. Andaman Sarvajanik Nirman Vibhag Mazdoor Sangh & Ors., a Division Bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Smita Das De upheld the direction to consider the 2023 regularisation scheme, coming down heavily on the Centre's conduct.
Case: Union of India & Ors. v. Shri Yohannan Sajeevan & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 210
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the striking down of a recruitment rule that exempted certain in-service candidates from possessing minimum educational qualifications for promotion, holding that such relaxation was arbitrary, violative of UGC norms, and amounted to granting a “premium to illegality.” Dismissing a writ petition filed by the Union of India and the Andaman and Nicobar Administration, the Court affirmed the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal which had invalidated Note-3 of the Recruitment Rules dated October 4, 2022 and directed consequential action.
Case Title: Sukanta Chattopadhyay vs. Kakali Bhattacharya
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 211
The Calcutta High Court has quashed a criminal defamation proceeding against a school Headmaster, holding that allegations relating to salary withholding, harassment, or disciplinary action—without any imputation lowering a person's reputation in the eyes of others—do not constitute an offence under Section 500 of the IPC.
Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee observed that “if the moral or intellectual character of the person concerned is not lowered in the estimation of others, simply making of imputation… cannot per se lead to commission of offence of defamation,” emphasizing that reputational harm is a sine qua non for invoking criminal defamation.
Case Title: Subhadeep Chakraborty vs. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 212
The Calcutta High Court quashed criminal proceedings against a father accused of assaulting his minor son during a court-ordered visitation, holding that the allegations, even if taken at face value, did not disclose the essential ingredients of the offences alleged and were inherently improbable.
The case arose from a matrimonial dispute where the petitioner had been granted visitation rights to meet his six-year-old son at the court premises.
Case Title: Shantanu Moitra & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 213
The Calcutta High Court has quashed a criminal case under Section 498A IPC against a husband and his aged mother, holding that in the peculiar facts of the case, taking away a child from the mother for his welfare could not amount to “mental cruelty.”
Deciding a revision petition, Justice Apurba Sinha Ray set aside the trial court's order refusing discharge and held that continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law.
Case: Mansur Ali @ Mansur Seikh @ Mansur SK @ Machuur Ali V. The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 214
The Calcutta High Court has granted bail to an accused booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, holding that prolonged pre-trial detention with little progress in trial violates the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Apurba Sinha Ray allowed the appeal filed by Mansur Ali @ Mansur Seikh @ Mansur SK @ Machuur Ali, who had been in custody for over two years and eight months, observing that “he cannot be kept in incarceration indefinitely without convicting him when nobody can tell when the trial will end.”
Case: JYOTIRMOY BISWAS -VS- STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 215
The Calcutta High Court has clarified that a spouse's earning capacity cannot be ignored even at the ad-interim stage, setting aside a maintenance order granted to a qualified doctor without examining her financial status in light of the disclosure norms mandated in Rajnesh v. Neha.
Justice Uday Kumar was hearing a criminal revisional application filed by a husband challenging an ex-parte ad-interim order directing him to pay ₹12,000 per month to his wife and ₹8,000 towards maintenance of their minor daughter under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Case: BIKASH CHANDRA PAUL VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 216
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of a husband under Sections 306 and 498A of the IPC in a 1994 suicide case, holding that the prosecution failed to establish the essential ingredients of abetment or cruelty beyond reasonable doubt. Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das allowed the criminal appeal and acquitted the appellant, observing that there was “no direct act or incitement to the commission of suicide” attributable to him.
The case arose from a complaint lodged by the deceased woman's brother, who alleged that his sister had been subjected to sustained physical and mental torture by her husband and his sister, culminating in her death by hanging in her matrimonial home. The trial court had convicted the husband in 2009, sentencing him to seven years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 306 IPC and three years under Section 498A IPC. Aggrieved, the husband approached the High Court.
Case: Sampa Sarkar Vs. The State of West Bengal and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 217
The Calcutta High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against a Bangladeshi Hindu woman accused of overstaying in India without a valid visa under the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, holding that whether she qualifies for statutory protection as a victim of religious persecution can only be determined at trial.
Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee observed that although the Immigration and Foreigners (Exemption) Order, 2025 grants protection to persecuted minorities from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan who entered India on or before December 31, 2024, the burden lies on the accused to establish entitlement to such exemption.
Case Title: Xenixt Technologies Private Limited & Ors. v. Reserve Bank of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 218
The Calcutta High Court has held that bank accounts cannot be frozen merely on the basis of complaints received through the Ministry of Home Affairs' cybercrime portal, without any order from a competent court under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
Justice Krishna Rao directed the immediate defreezing of the accounts of Xenixt Technologies Private Limited after finding that neither the bank nor the authorities could show any judicial order authorising the freezing action.
Case Title: Overseas Scrap Trading Corporation vs Howrah Municipal Corporation and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 219
The Howrah Municipal Corporation cannot indefinitely withhold execution of a sale deed in favour of the highest bidder merely because the State Government failed to grant approval, the Calcutta High Court has held, while directing completion of a land sale process pending since 2010.
Justice Shampa Sarkar observed that the statutory powers of the municipal corporation under the Howrah Municipal Corporation Act could not be curtailed by an undisclosed cabinet decision or subsequent government policy, particularly when no statutory rules mandated prior approval from the State.
Case: Meena Gupta Vs. Union of India and others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 220
The Calcutta High Court has held that a Public Interest Litigation challenging alleged violations of the Forest Rights Act in connection with the Great Nicobar infrastructure project is maintainable, rejecting the Union Government's objection that the petitioner lacked locus standi because she is a resident of Hyderabad and not of the Andaman & Nicobar Islands.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen observed that there can be “no thumb rule” regarding locus standi in PILs and that courts must permit genuine public causes concerning vulnerable communities to be raised even by persons not directly affected.
Case Title: Moniza Farooquee & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 221
The Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a married sister-in-law and her husband in a dowry harassment case, holding that vague allegations of “instigation” against relatives living separately for over a decade cannot sustain prosecution under Sections 498A and 406 IPC.
Justice Uday Kumar observed that the tendency to “rope in” distantly residing relatives through omnibus allegations amounts to abuse of criminal process and warned that matrimonial litigation cannot be converted into a tool of harassment.
Case Title: Gautam Dey v. Golam Saharia
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 222
The Calcutta High Court has held that criminal liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is strictly personal to the drawer of the cheque and cannot be inherited by legal heirs or business associates after the drawer's death.
Justice Uday Kumar quashed criminal proceedings initiated against a man whose deceased brother had allegedly issued a cheque towards repayment of a ₹27 lakh loan.
Case Title: Md. Shams Biswas @ Tapan Biswas v. United Bank of India (now Punjab National Bank)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 223
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the premature retirement of a former Senior Manager of the erstwhile United Bank of India after taking note of his allegations that sustained caste-based discrimination at the workplace compelled him to renounce Hinduism and embrace Islam.
Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay observed that constitutional guarantees under Articles 14, 15 and 25 are “not ornamental declarations but enforceable mandates,” and stressed that no adverse administrative consequence can be predicated upon an individual's choice of faith.
Case Title: Shreya Basak & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 224
The Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a woman and her father accused of abetting the suicide of her husband, observing that remarks questioning a man's “manhood” or refusal to continue a matrimonial relationship, by themselves, do not constitute abetment to suicide under Section 306 IPC.
Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee held that there was no material showing any direct instigation, intentional aid, or positive act on the part of the accused which could have driven the deceased to take the extreme step.
Case Title: Manindra Nath Mishri v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 225
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the conviction and life sentence of a man for murdering his wife by strangulation, holding that the medical evidence, “last seen” circumstances, and proof of a strained marital relationship arising out of the husband's alleged extramarital affairs formed a complete chain pointing to guilt.
A Division Bench of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Rai Chattopadhyay dismissed the appeal filed by Manindra Nath Mishri against his conviction under Sections 302 and 498A IPC in connection with the death of his wife at their matrimonial home in Haldia in June 2013.
Case Title: Arnab Dam v. The State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 226
The Calcutta High Court has refused to suspend the sentence of alleged Maoist leader Arnab Dam, convicted in the 2010 Silda EFR camp attack case in which 24 security personnel were killed, observing that injured eyewitnesses are likely to remember the faces of attackers involved in “such a major terrorist attack.”
A Division Bench of Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Apurba Sinha Ray rejected Dam's plea for suspension of sentence pending appeal, noting the “exceptional gravity” of the offences and the prima facie incriminating evidence against him.
Calcutta High Court Upholds Misconduct Finding Against SAIL Employee For Encroaching On Company Land
Case Title: Debnath Swarnakar v. The Steel Authority of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 227
The Calcutta High Court has upheld disciplinary proceedings initiated against a Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) employee for unauthorized use and encroachment of company land, while partly granting relief by setting aside the punishment insofar as it imposed reduction of pay “with cumulative effect”.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen held that the employee's act of constructing a brick wall structure and fencing over SAIL land amounted to “misconduct” under the company's standing orders.
Case: Sirsanya Bandopadhyay Vs. Union of India & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 228
The Calcutta High Court has issued interim directions to the State Police, asking them to ensure the safe return of persons who were allegedly displaced from their shops, homes or properties, regardless of political affiliation, in PILs against alleged post-poll violence in the wake of the 2026 West Bengal Assembly election results.
Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen held, "The police shall also ensure that if any citizen irrespective of his/her party affiliation, is illegally thrown out of his shop/house/property etc. due to post poll violence, he/she shall be given a safe return to his shop/house/property etc."
Case: Sahidul Laskar Vs. The General Manager, Eastern Railway & Ors
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 229
The Calcutta High Court has passed an interim order staying all proceedings pursuant to the impugned eviction notice issued in relation to the Brace Bridge railway station area until 20 May 2026 or until further orders. The writ petition was moved on behalf of nearly 6,000 slum dwellers residing in the locality adjacent to Brace Bridge Railway Station.
Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya held: "Whether the procedure prescribed under the relevant statute for eviction of the petitioner from the premises in question has been followed or not, also has to be examined. Since an accommodation has been sought for by the learned advocate representing the respondent authorities, this Court is inclined to pass an interim order for a limited period. There shall be an order of stay of operation of the notice dated May 9, 2026 till May 20, 2026 or until further order whichever is earlier."
Case: Md Yasmin v State of West Bengal
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 230
The Calcutta High Court on Thursday restrained further demolition of a Tiljala building where a fire in a leather goods manufacturing unit claimed two workers' lives earlier this week, while simultaneously prohibiting any business activity from the premises until further orders.
Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury passed the interim order in a writ petition filed by residents of the premises at Tiljala, who challenged the demolition drive initiated by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation following the May 12 fire incident.
Case Title: Goutam Saha & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 231
The Calcutta High Court has held that even after a criminal revision is finally disposed of, the High Court can invoke its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to permit compounding of an offence where a subsequent change in circumstances creates a statutory right to compound the offence.
Justice Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee observed that although courts ordinarily become functus officio after pronouncing final judgment, “the doctrine of functus officio will yield to justice for which law exists,” particularly where the offence becomes compoundable only after the High Court alters the conviction from a non-compoundable offence to a compoundable one.
Case Title: Deepak Kumar v. Airports Authority of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 232
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging cancellation of candidature in an Airports Authority of India recruitment process after the candidate failed to submit the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) certificate for the financial year specified in the recruitment notification.
Justice Amrita Sinha held that a recruiting authority cannot be compelled to accept documents contrary to the conditions prescribed in the recruitment notice and observed that “it is not open for a job aspirant to direct the recruiting authority for prescribing conditions for holding the recruitment process.”
Case Title Shayan Sachin Basu v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 233
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging the recruitment notifications issued for the West Bengal Judicial Service Examinations, 2023 and 2024, which allegedly omitted the mandatory requirement of three years' practice as an Advocate for entry-level judicial posts.
While refusing to interfere with the ongoing recruitment process, the Court directed the authorities to ensure that future judicial service examinations are conducted in compliance with the Supreme Court's ruling in the All India Judges Association v. Union of India case mandating three years' practice at the Bar for Civil Judge (Junior Division) posts.
Case Title: Bonoshree Hazra @ Mollah v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 234
The Calcutta High Court has held that a Muslim man cannot evade payment of maintenance to a Hindu woman who married him after allegedly converting to Islam merely by disputing the validity of the marriage, so long as the marriage has not been declared void by a competent court.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das restored an interim maintenance order in favour of a woman and her minor son, observing that depriving them of maintenance at a preliminary stage despite prima facie proof of marriage and paternity would amount to “gross illegality.”
Case: Jaiprakash Gupta vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 235
The Calcutta High Court has refused to entertain an appeal filed by a husband, against a single bench order, seeking to avoid taking back his medically incapacitated wife from a private hospital, observing that the plea was nothing but an attempt to “abandon her” and evade his “moral, humanitarian and legal obligations”.
A division bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar and Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta directed that the woman, Poonam Gupta, who has remained admitted at Apollo Multispeciality Hospitals Limited since September 2021 following an accident, be escorted back to her matrimonial home with police assistance.
Case: Amal Dhabal vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 236
The Calcutta High Court has acquitted an Army officer convicted for rape on the allegation that he established a physical relationship with a woman on a false promise of marriage, holding that the relationship, which began after the parties met on Tinder, was consensual and continued voluntarily for over three-and-a-half years.
A Division Bench of Justices Arijit Banerjee and Apurba Sinha Ray held that there was no evidence to show that the accused never intended to marry the complainant from the inception of the relationship. The Court consequently set aside his conviction under Section 376(1) IPC.
Case Title AKHRUZZAMAN VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. and batch
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 237
The Calcutta High Court on Thursday refused to stay the West Bengal government's notification regulating cattle slaughter ahead of Eid-ul-Azha, holding that the May 13 notification merely implemented earlier unchallenged directions issued by the Court itself in 2018.
However, in a significant direction, the division bench of Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen ordered the State to amend the impugned notice by expressly incorporating that slaughter of animals, including cows and buffaloes, in open public places is strictly prohibited and that “sacrifice of a cow is no part of the festival of Id-Uz-Zoha and is not a religious requirement under Islam,” as decided by the Supreme Court in Hanif Quershi v State of Bihar.
Case: Asim Kumar Paul v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 238
The Calcutta High Court has quashed the removal of a railway employee from service after holding that the departmental proceedings and criminal prosecution were founded on substantially identical allegations, evidence and circumstances, and that his subsequent acquittal in the criminal case rendered the disciplinary findings unsustainable.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen allowed the writ petition filed by Asim Kumar Paul, a former Senior TNC/NH employee of the Railways, and directed the authorities to release all retiral benefits to him on a notional basis as if he had retired normally upon superannuation.
Case: Pratap Digal Vs. The State of West Bengal and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 239
The Calcutta High Court has acquitted a Serampore College professor who had been convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, holding that the prosecution failed to establish the “foundational facts” necessary to invoke the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act.
A Division Bench of Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Apurba Sinha Ray observed that the trial court had “straightway” invoked the presumption under Section 29 without properly analysing whether the prosecution evidence was reliable and free from “blemishes and anomalies.”
Case: Indradevi Sonkar Versus Howrah Municipal Corporation & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 240
The Calcutta High Court has held that while unauthorised constructions cannot be protected from demolition, the constitutional right to shelter under Article 21 requires authorities and private developers to ensure the rehabilitation of occupants displaced by such illegal construction.
Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury passed the order while hearing a plea by a tenant residing on the fifth floor of a G+5 building in Howrah, where the additional fourth and fifth floors were allegedly constructed without sanction.
Case: Louis Dreyfus Company India Private Limited v/s. Enforcement Directorate, Government of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 241
The Calcutta High Court has quashed money laundering proceedings against Louis Dreyfus Company India Private Limited, holding that the Enforcement Directorate cannot prosecute an entity for laundering “proceeds of crime” when the CBI, after a full-fledged investigation into the predicate offence, found no material showing its involvement in the alleged criminal activity.
Justice Suvra Ghosh observed that the ED had primarily relied upon the statement of a co-accused recorded under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, without any independent material establishing the company's involvement in money laundering.
Case: Emon Roy Vs. The State of West Bengal and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 242
The Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a man accused of deliberately running over and killing a stray dog, holding that the materials on record failed to establish the “mens rea” or criminal intent necessary to attract offences under Sections 428 and 429 IPC and Section 11(1)(a) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
Justice Dr. Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee observed that the incident, at best, appeared to be “an unfortunate road accident involving a stray animal” and that continuing the prosecution would amount to an abuse of the process of court.
Case: KALINATH SASMAL VERSUS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANOTHER
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 243
The Calcutta High Court has held that criminal courts cannot adjudicate interim possessory rights over immovable property while exercising powers under the Police Act, 1861, observing that disputes concerning title, succession and possession fall exclusively within the domain of civil courts.
Justice Kausik Chanda set aside orders of the Chief Judicial Magistrate and the appellate court which had directed handing over of keys and interim possessory control of a Kolkata property to a claimant asserting himself to be the deceased owner's son.
Case: Indiamart Inter Mesh Limited v. Open AI Inc. and Others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 245
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed IndiaMart's plea seeking interim directions against OpenAI, holding that a private business cannot compel ChatGPT to display or prioritize its website links in AI-generated responses. The Court observed that there is no legal right entitling one private entity to have its business promoted on another private platform and that any such direction would amount to dictating how ChatGPT should operate.
Case : ABHISHEK BANERJEE VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 246
The Calcutta High Court on Thursday granted interim protection from coercive action to Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee in a case alleging forgery of signatures of newly-elected TMC MLAs in a resolution relating to the appointment of the Leader of Opposition after the Assembly elections.
Case: Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Saanvi Samanta & Anr. and connected matters.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 247
The Calcutta High Court has enhanced compensation awarded for the death of a homemaker in a motor accident case, underscoring that the contribution of a wife and mother to her family is “invaluable” and cannot be measured merely in monetary terms.
Case: Mukesh Kumar Pandey v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 248
The Calcutta High Court has reinstated a Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) constable whose services were terminated after authorities revisited and enhanced a punishment earlier imposed for suppression of a pending criminal case at the time of recruitment.
Case: Tara Sharma & Ors. v. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr.,
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 249
The Calcutta High Court has enhanced compensation awarded to the family of a deceased motor accident victim, holding that in the absence of conclusive evidence regarding age, courts and tribunals must rely on the age recorded in the post-mortem report rather than presumptions drawn from the fact that the deceased was receiving pension.
Case Name : Gitesh Das Mahapatra Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 250
A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising Justice Madhuresh Prasad and Justice Prasenjit Biswas held that the dismissal of a prior proceeding as infructuous due to a defective charge memo does not bar the disciplinary authority from issuing a fresh, proper charge memo as Order 23 Rule 1 CPC does not apply.
Case: SOBHANDEB CHATTOPADHYAY VS HON'BLE SPEAKER , WEST BENGAL LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY AND OTHERS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 251
The Calcutta High Court on Thursday refused to grant interim relief to senior Trinamool Congress leader Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay in his challenge to the appointment of a rival faction leader, Ritabrata Banerjee, as the Leader of Opposition in the West Bengal Legislative Assembly, holding that no prima facie case had been made out for an injunction. (2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 251)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 252
The Calcutta High Court on Friday disposed of a petition challenging the West Bengal Government's notification calling upon government employees to participate in the International Yoga Day event to be led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi at Kolkata's Red Road, after the State clarified that participation was purely voluntary and that no coercive or punitive action would be taken against employees who chose not to attend.
Case Title: Dr. Arjun Chowdhury v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 253
The Calcutta High Court has held that a partnership firm constituted exclusively for carrying on the legal profession cannot be compelled to produce a trade licence as a precondition for registration under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, observing that such a requirement finds no place in the statutory scheme governing registration of partnership firms.
Case: ANIL KUMAR GUPTA v THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 254
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the conviction of a man for rape, holding that a subsequent promise to marry after an initial act of forcible sexual assault cannot absolve the accused of criminal liability. The Court observed that while the parties later entered into a physical relationship on the accused's repeated assurances of marriage, the initial act was without the victim's consent and the subsequent false promises only prolonged her exploitation.
Case Title: Puja Hari v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 255
The Calcutta High Court has set aside an order attaching properties belonging to a woman who was not even named as an accused in a criminal case, while issuing significant guidelines on the exercise of powers under Section 107 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).
Case Title: Dr. Sreeparna Ghosh v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 256
The Calcutta High Court has directed Haldia Institute of Dental Sciences and Research (HIDSAR) to refund ₹9.5 lakh to a postgraduate dental student and return all her original certificates, holding that the institution could not withhold educational documents or deny fee refund after the student withdrew from the course within the period stipulated under the UGC Fee Refund Policy.
Case Title: Rabishankar Das v. State of West Bengal & Ors. with Nabendu Mahali v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 257
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the West Bengal Government's decision dissolving the Board of Councillors of the Purulia Municipality, holding that the action was vitiated by violation of the principles of natural justice as the State relied upon a District Magistrate's inquiry report without supplying it to the elected councillors.