Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2332/2026 of PRAVAS MANDAL Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 14 September 2026
Sl. No. 6 Ct. No. 446 SG [ALLOWED] C. R. M. ( A ) 2332 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Harishchandrapur Police Station Case No. 1258/2023 dated 12.12.2023 under Sections 54363/365/34 of the
14.09.2026
Sl. No. 6
Ct. No. 446
SG
[ALLOWED]
C. R. M. (A) 2332 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Harishchandrapur Police Station Case No. 1258/2023 dated 12.12.2023
under Sections 54363/365/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4/17 of the POCSO Act.
And
In Re: Pravas Mandal.
… … Petitioner
Mr. Sk. Samiul Haque,
Mr. Dhananjay Banerjee,
Mr. Arup Kumar Bhowmick,
Mr. Mahiul Iscay.
… for the petitioner
Mr. Rajesh Kr. Shah.
… 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. Mr. Haque, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was aged about 19 years, whereas the victim was aged about 16 years at the time of the alleged incident. He submits that, following a love affair, they voluntarily left their respective houses, tied the knot and started living as husband and wife. However, subsequently, a dispute cropped up between them, and they started living separately. Under the pressure of her family members, she made certain statements against the petitioner before the Magistrate, which have been recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. He submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted and, therefore, custodial interrogation of the present petitioner is not necessary.
2. Mr. Shah, learned Advocate appearing for the State, produces the case diary and memorandum of evidence and vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
2
3. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the case diary and other materials on record. The records suggest that the victim did not undergo medical examination. The charge-sheet has been submitted. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the present petitioner is not warranted and that the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioner.
4. In view of the above, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
5. Accordingly, I direct that, in the event of arrest, the petitioner, viz. Pravas Mandal be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/-, with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Judge, 1st Court, Special Court, Chanchal, Malda and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
6. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.
(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)