Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/2158/2026 of KRISHNA KUMAR MAHATO @ KRISHNA MAHATO Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 21 September 2026
Court No.35. D/L.641. Rakib (Rejected) CRM (M) 2158 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 Uttarpara Police Station case no. 152 of 2025 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.
21.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L.641. Rakib (Rejected)
CRM (M) 2158 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 Uttarpara Police Station case no. 152 of 2025 dated 17.07.2025 under Section 6 POCSO Act, 2012.
And In the matter of : Krishna Kumar Mahato @ Krishna Mahato
……Petitioner. Mr. Tapan Kumar Dey Mr. Rakesh Roy Mr. Nirupam Sarkar
.....for the Petitioner. Mr. Somoproyo Chowdhury Mr. Jnip Bose
……for the State. Mr. Saryati Datta
.......for the Victim
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody for more than 429 days, although charges have been framed but the evidence of the case is progressing very slowly, as such petitioner be released on bail. Learned advocate has also tried to impress upon this Court by pleading certain deficiencies in the investigation which has been carried out including the subject matter of age of the victim. Mr. Datta, learned advocate empanelled with the High Legal Aid Services Authority is directed to appear for the de-facto complainant/private opposite party. His appearance may be regularized by the concerned authorities. Mr. Datta represent the de-facto complainant opposes the prayer for bail and submits that at the relevant point of time victim was of tender age who has been subjected to sexual abuse at the behest of the present petitioner.
2 Learned advocate appearing for the State produces the Case Diary and drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of victim under Section 183 of the BNSS and the attending medical documents which prima facie reflects that as a consequential act the victim became pregnant which was of six months. Having regard to the facts of the present case, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for enlarging the petitioner on bail. As such, prayer for bail of the petitioner in CRM (M) 2158 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.)