Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/3117/2026 of VRINDRAVAN DAS @ BIRANDABAN DAS Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 30 September 2026
30.09.2026 Rohit, A.R.(Ct.) ct.no.35 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M ( A ) 3117 of 2026 Vrindravan Das @ Birandaban Das Vs The State of West Bengal & Anr. In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya
D/L 611
30.09.2026
Rohit, A.R.(Ct.)
ct.no.35
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
C.R.M (A) 3117 of 2026
Vrindravan Das @ Birandaban Das
Vs
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 arising out of Kaliganj Police Station Case No. 404 of 2026 dated 01.06.2026 under Sections 137(2)/140(3)/65(1)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012
And
In the matter of : Vrindravan Das @ Birandaban Das
……Petitioner.
Mr. Asraf Mandal
…for the Petitioner
Mr. Subhajit Chatterjee
Mr. Kuntal Ray
…for the State
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.
1. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been foisted with the instant criminal case.
2. Learned Advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and has produced the Case Diary.
3. I have taken into account the statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS. Victim is a minor of 14 years while the accused/petitioner is of 26 years.
4. Having considered the fact that for a period of 18 to 20 days both of them fled away and was in a physical relationship for five to six days.
5. Considering the minor tender age of the victim, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. As such, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.
6. Accordingly, with the aforesaid observations, C.R.M. (A) 3117 of 2026 is dismissed.
7. Memo of evidence submitted be kept with the record.
8. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the Official website of this Court.
9. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)