Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/1997/2026 of DURGA HANSDA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 22 September 2026
22.09.2026 Rohit, A.R.(Ct.) ct.no.35 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M (M) 1997 of 2026 Durga Hansda Vs The State of West Bengal & Anr. In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/ Section 483 of
D/L 610
22.09.2026
Rohit, A.R.(Ct.)
ct.no.35
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
C.R.M (M) 1997 of 2026
Durga Hansda
Vs
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/ Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Gurguripal Police Station Case No. 115 of 2024 dated 23.11.2024 under Sections 329(4)/65(2) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
And
In the matter of : Durga Hansda
……Petitioner.
Mr. Shataroop Purkayastha
Mr. Abhishek Chakraborty
Mr. Sohail Ahmed Ansari
Ms. Rajorna MAzumder
Mr. Suman Singha
…for the Petitioner
Mr. Parmanand Sharma, A.P.P
Mr. Karan Dudhwewola
…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. Report submitted by the State effecting service upon the private opposite party be kept with the record.
2. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that there are no offence made out under Section 6 of the POCSO Act or under Section 65(2) of the BNS.
3. Learned Advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and produces the Case Diary. The evidence of the victim has also been enclosed.
4. I find that the victim has corroborated the incident in the evidence.
5. Having considered the same I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for granting bail to the petitioner. As such prayer for bail of the petitioner, namely, Durga Hansda is rejected.
6. With the aforesaid observation, C.R.M (M) 1997 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.)