Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/1584/2026 of HRITTICK SARKAR @ HIRTTICK SARKAR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 10 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.3 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected C.R.M. (M) 1584 of 2026 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Chakdah Police Station Case No. 1393 of 2024
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.
10.09.2026
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.3
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected C.R.M. (M) 1584 of 2026
In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, filed in connection with Chakdah Police Station Case No. 1393 of 2024 dated 03.12.2024 under Sections 137(2)/140(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
And
In Re : Hrittick Sarkar @ Hirttick Sarkar ... Petitioner.
Mr. Sumanta Das
... For the Petitioner.
Mr. Gouranga Kumar Das, APP, Mr. Sanjib Das
... For the State.
Ms. Rituparna Ghosh
... For the de facto complainant.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that there were earlier cases and the petitioner is being foisted with several cases. As such, he may be granted bail. Earlier a report has been submitted by the Investigating Officer of the case that supplementary charge- sheet has been filed with the necessary witnesses and documents. Learned advocate appearing for the de facto complainant opposes the prayer for bail. Learned advocate appearing for the State has produced the case diary and drawn the attention of the Court to the relevant materials. Having considered the fact that evidence of the victim is yet to be recorded before the learned Trial Court, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail at this stage. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Petitioner will renew his prayer for bail after the evidence of victim is over. Memo of Evidence submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record. The application for bail, being CRM (M) 1584 of 2026, is, thus, dismissed. All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly 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.)