Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/1892/2026 of PURNA DUTTA @ PUNYA DUTTA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 14 September 2026
no. 19 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court) CRM (M) 1892 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 Berhampore PS Case No. 168 of 2024 dated 4th February, 2024 u/s 376/511 of the IPC 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.
14.09.2026 Serial no. 19 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court)
CRM (M) 1892 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 Berhampore PS Case No. 168 of 2024 dated 4th February, 2024 u/s 376/511 of the IPC and u/s 8 of the POCSO Act.
-And-
In the matter of : Purna Dutta @ Punya Dutta
… Petitioner(s)
Mr. Arnab Chatterjee Mr. AVik Ghosh
… for the Petitioner(s)
Mr. Debojyoti Deb Mr. Debapratim Guha
… for the State-respondent(s)
Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for two years six months and only six witnesses as also the vulnerable witnesses till date have been examined. State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that nine witnesses have already been completed. State has drawn 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. Having considered the materials appearing against the present petitioner, I am of the view that this is not a fit case for granting bail to the present petitioner.
2 Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected. Accordingly, CRM (M) 1892 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.)