Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/2264/2026 of XXXX Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 7 October 2026
Court No.35. M/L.88. Rakib (Rejected) CRM (M) 2264 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Monteswar Police Station case no. 221 of 2026 dated
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
07.10.2026 Court No.35. M/L.88. Rakib (Rejected)
CRM (M) 2264 of 2026
In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Monteswar Police Station case no. 221 of 2026 dated 17.05.2026 under Sections 9/10/11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
And In the matter of : XXXX
……Petitioner. Mr. Dhananjay Banerjee Mr. Mahiul Islam
.....for the Petitioner. Mr. Arka Mukherjee
……for the State. Mr. Amitava Chowdhury Mr. Debasis Sur
.......for OP No.2
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner was arrested on 17.05.2026 and since then he is in custody, charges have been framed and victim has already been examined, as such, petitioner be released on bail. Learned advocate for the de-facto complainant opposes the prayer for bail. Learned advocate appearing for the State also opposes the prayer for bail and draws the attention of the Court to the statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS. I have taken into account the statement of the victim under section 183 of the BNSS and is of the opinion that there are two other vulnerable witnesses being the parents of the minor.
2 Having considered the case was set in motion by mother of the victim, I am of the opinion that let the evidence of the parents of the victim be over, the same be completed by the learned Special Court within a period of three months from the next date fixed. Petitioner will renew his prayer for bail after the aforesaid time period is over. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner in CRM (M) 2264 of 2026 is dismissed at this stage. Memo of evidence submitted by the State be kept with the record. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)