Calcutta High Court

CRM(M)/2113/2026 of XXX THE PETITIONER Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 29 September 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

Court No.35. D/L.485. Rakib (Rejected) CRM (M) 2113 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 Baruipur Police Station case no. 1706 of 2024 dated

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

29.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L.485. Rakib (Rejected)

CRM (M) 2113 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 Baruipur Police Station case no. 1706 of 2024 dated 25.10.2024 under Sections 318(2)/137(2)/64(1)/316(2)/351(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and under Section 9/11 of the Prevention of Child Marriage Act.

And In the matter of : XXX The Petitioner

……Petitioner. Mr. Manabendranath Bandhyopadhyay Mr. Shaheb Sadhukhan Mr. Rahul Patra Mr. Sanatan Mukherjee

.....for the Petitioner. Mr. Abhinav Rakshit

......for the De-facto complainant. Mr. Kaustuv Shome Mr. Snehasis Banerjee

……for the State.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that he has been falsely implicated in connection with the instant case. Learned advocate appearing for the de-facto complainant submits that there was force imposed on the victim. Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail, draws the attention of the Court to the Statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS as well as the medico legal examination report. It has been informed that next date is fixed for consideration of charges. Having regard to the same, I am of the opinion that petitioner be well advised to approach this Court after the cross-examination

2 of the victim is over. At this stage, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Accordingly, CRM (M) 2113 of 2026 is dismissed. 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.)

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead