Addition Of Text Above Signature On Receipt Raises 'Grave Suspicion': Calcutta High Court Refuses To Discharge Forgery AccusedCase: Gopal Banerjee & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Anr. Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 122The 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...
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.