Tuhin Majumder vs The State Bank Of India And Anr
2025 Latest Caselaw 3535 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Tuhin Majumder vs The State Bank Of India And Anr on 17 December, 2025

Author: Saugata Bhattacharyya

Bench: Saugata Bhattacharyya

                                         1
                                                                                     2025:CHC-OS:258



                             IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                            CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
                                      ORIGINAL SIDE

                                      WPO/859/2025
                                    TUHIN MAJUMDER
                                           VS
                            THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR


BEFORE:

The Hon'ble JUSTICE SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA

HEARD ON           : 17.12.2025

JUDGMENT ON : 17.12.2025

For Petitioner :                                       Mr. Debashis Banerjee, Advocate
                                                       Ms. Gargi Roy, Advocate
                                                       Mr. Subrata Saha, Advocate
                                                       Mr. Rakesh Jana, Advocate
                                                       Mr. Abhik Biswas, Advocate

For Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 :                            Mr. Subrata Kumar Sinha, Advocate



Saugata Bhattacharyya, J. :

1. Matter is heard in presence of the learned Advocates representing the

petitioner and State Bank of India being the contesting respondent.

2. Petitioner was an employee of State Bank of India who was implicated in a

criminal proceeding which culminated into an order of conviction dated 29 th

July, 2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, First Court, Barasat.

Petitioner along with two other persons were found guilty for commission of

offence under Section 498A/306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted

2025:CHC-OS:258

by the learned Advocate representing the petitioner that the criminal

proceeding was initiated due to unnatural death of petitioner's wife.

3. Petitioner preferred appeal against the order of conviction before the High

Court being CRA(SB) 111 of 2025 in connection with which an application

being CRAN 1 of 2025 was moved before a co-ordinate Bench.

4. From the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench on 24th September, 2025 on

the aforesaid appeal and application it appears that the petitioner herein

being one of the appellants sought for suspension of sentence. However, co-

ordinate Bench vide order dated 24th September, 2025 granted bail on certain

conditions including appearance of the petitioner before the learned

Magistrate once in a month till disposal of the appeal.

5. Prayer is made by presenting this writ petition which would permit the

petitioner to resume duty as an employee of State Bank of India subject to

final result of the appeal. In support of such submission reliance is placed on

an order passed by a co-ordinate Bench dated 12th September, 2013 in a writ

petition being WPA 16734 of 2010 (Ramgopal Sikder Vs. State Bank of India &

Ors.).

6. However, it is rightly pointed out by the learned Advocate representing Bank

Authority that in Ramgopal Sikder (supra) order of conviction was stayed in

appeal but in the present case prayer was made for suspension of sentence

and the co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 24th September, 2025 granted bail.

Appeal is still pending for final adjudication.

2025:CHC-OS:258

7. This Court cannot shut its eyes to the fact that petitioner was convicted of

committing offence which is punishable under Section 498A/306/34 of the

IPC and the trial court vide order dated 29th July, 2025 sentenced the

petitioner thereby directing that the petitioner shall suffer rigorous

imprisonment of seven years and payment of fine of Rs.50,000/- with default

clause.

8. Considering the aforesaid facts, Court is not inclined to permit the petitioner

to resume duty at this stage when appeal is pending

9. Writ petition stands dismissed.

10. Urgent xerox certified copy, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon

compliance with all necessary formalities.

[SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.]

sd/