Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/1819/2026 of SUDIPTO MANDAL @ SUDIP MANDAL @ SUDIM Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 15 September 2026
no. 15 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court) CRM (M) 1819 of 2026 In re : An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with Baishnabnagar PS Case No. 84 of 2026 dated 24.01.2026 u/s 137(2)/140(3) of the BNS and
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.
15.09.2026 Serial no. 15 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court)
CRM (M) 1819 of 2026
In re : An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with Baishnabnagar PS Case No. 84 of 2026 dated 24.01.2026 u/s 137(2)/140(3) of the BNS and section 6 of the POCSO Act [POCSO Case No. 83 of 2026].
-And-
In the matter of : Sudipto Mandal @ Sudip Mandal @ Sudim
… Petitioner(s)
Mr. Narattam Acharya Mr. Sayan Das
… for the Petitioner(s)
Mr. Priyankar Ganguly Ms. Jayashree Patra
… for the State-respondent(s) Ms. R. V. Kundalia
… for the defacto-complainant
Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the victim had a relationship with the present petitioner. Consequently, the relationship turned sour and the present case has been initiated. Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and draws the attention of the court to the statement of the victim under section 183 of the BNSS I have taken into account the overall circumstances of the case particularly the stage of the case. It has been submitted that next date has been fixed for consideration of charges.
2 Having considered the same, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected. Accordingly, CRM (M) 1819 of 2026 is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, is also disposed of. Memo of evidence submitted be kept with the record. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)