Shuvendu Saha vs State Of West Bengal

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(SC) 396

VIKRAM NATH, SANDEEP MEHTA
Shuvendu Saha – Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Siva Prasad Ghose, Adv. Mr. Anondo Mukherjee, Adv. Ms. Parul Sharma, Adv. Mr. Jitender Kumar, Adv. Mr. Anil Kumar, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Rohit Dutta, Adv. (VC) Mr. Anas Tanwir, AOR Mr. Suryanu Sengupta, Adv. Mr. Dhrubajit Saikia, Adv. Ms. A. Banerjee, Adv. Ms. Geetanjali Nagpal, Adv. Mr. Kunal Mimani, AOR Mr. Prashant Alai, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Rana, Adv.

ORDER :

Sandeep Mehta, J.

1. Heard.

2. Issue notice.

3. Mr. Kunal Mimani, learned counsel appearing for the State of West Bengal, accepts notice on advance service. Mr. Rohit Dutta, learned counsel, appears via video conferencing on behalf of respondent No.2¹[Hereinafter, referred to as the “respondent No.2-complainant”.] on caveat.

4. Leave granted.

5. Facts involved in the present appeal manifest a remarkably perverse exercise of revisional jurisdiction by learned Single Judge of the High Court at Calcutta²[Hereinafter, referred to as the “High Court”.] who has, in a revision filed at the instance of the respondent No.2-complainant, set aside the order granting bail to the accused-appellant³[Hereinafter, referred to as the “appellant” or “accused”.] herein in a case involving offences triable by Court of Magistrate after a gap of nearly 8 years on absolutely hyper technical and untenable reasons.

6. The dispute between the appellant and respondent No.2-complainant is with regard to tenancy rights over a portion of a building, which was purchased by the appellant from its erstwhile owner. Respondent No.2-complainant instituted a civil suit against the appellant, being Title Suit No.328 o