Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/2165/2026 of xxxx Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 17 September 2026
17.09.2026 Rohit, A.R.(Ct.) ct.no.35 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M (M) 2165 of 2026 XXXX 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
D/L 424
17.09.2026
Rohit, A.R.(Ct.)
ct.no.35
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
C.R.M (M) 2165 of 2026
XXXX
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 Hingalganj Police Station Case No. 172 of 2026 dated 30.05.2026 under Sections 65(2)/64(2)(i)/64(j)/351(2) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 6 of the POCSO Act
And
In the matter of : XXXX
……Petitioner.
Mr. Himadri Kumar Mahato
Mr. Kunal Ganguly
Mr. Subhodip Maity
…for the Petitioner
Mr. Rajashree V. Kundalia
…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. Affidavit-of-service filed in Court be kept with the record.
2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for about 100 days. Charge-sheet has already been submitted before the jurisdictional Court. As such, petitioner be released on bail.
3. Learned Advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and produces the Case Diary and draws the attention of the Court to the statement of the minor girls under Section 183 of the BNSS. Additionally attention of the Court has been drawn to the medico legal examination report.
4. Having considered the overall materials appearing in the case diary I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for releasing the petitioner on bail. As such prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.
5. With the aforesaid observation, C.R.M (M) 2165 of 2026 is dismissed.
6. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the Official website of this Court.
7. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)