Calcutta High Court Monthly Digest: March 2026

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 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.2026 Bengal Assembly Polls: Calcutta High Court Declines To Interfere With Surveillance & Live Web-Streaming Tender CriteriaCase Title: Innovatiview India Ltd. v. Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal & Anr. Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 123The 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.Calcutta High Court Grants Bail To 74-Yr-Old Ex-SSC Advisor In PMLA Case; Says Prolonged Custody Without Trial Offends Article 21Case: Dr. Santi Prasad Sinha Vs Union of India & Anr. Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 124Granting 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.Order XI Rule 1(5) CPC Gives Court Discretion To Accept Delayed Documents On Showing Reasonable Cause: Calcutta High CourtCase Title: Usha Martin Limited v. Balurghat Technologies LimitedCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 125The 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.Calcutta High Court Cancels Bail Of POCSO Accused, Flags Trial Court's 'Mechanical' Grant Of Bail Once Chargesheet Was FiledCase: X v State of West Bengal Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 126The 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.” 'Bamboo Stick Or Rod Not An Instrument Likely To Cause Death': Calcutta High Court Reduces Man's SentenceCase: X v State of West Bengal Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Cal) 127The 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. Calcutta High Court Quashes Forgery Case Against Calcutta University Professor, Says Mere Suspicion Cannot Lead To TrialCase: Swapan Kumar Ghosh -vs- The State of West Bengal ...

Calcutta High Court Monthly Digest: March 2026

Srinjoy Das