Calcutta High Court
CRM(A)/483/2026 of BIPLAB BEHARI GOSWAMI Vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 28 July 2026
Court No.11 (GB) Calcutta High Court In the Circuit Bench at
28.07.2026
Item No.44
Court No.11
(GB)
Calcutta High Court
In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri
CRM (A) 483 of 2026
In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. 2023 in connection with Sadar Women Police Station Case No.53 of 2026 dated 31.03.2026
under Sections 8/12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.
And
In the matter of: Biplab Behari Goswami
….Petitioner.
Mr. Nabankur Paul,
Ms. Sutapa Sen Paul,
Mr. Bodhisatya Ghosh
…for the Petitioner.
Mr. Avrojyoti Das, Ld. App.,
Mr. Bijoy Bikram Das,
Mr. Nigam Mittal
… for the State.
Ms. Suman Sehanabis,
Ms. Anwesha Chakraborty
… for the De facto complaint.
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. The petitioner prays for pre-arrest bail in connection with Sadar Women Police Station Case No.53 of 2026 dated 31.03.2026 under Sections 8/12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.
2. The petitioner is the teacher of the victim. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. The petitioner caught the victim when she was cheating during an examination and the victim took revenge against the petitioner by filing a false complaint. It is submitted that the petitioner is a respectful personality of the locality. He was also the private tutor of the victim.
2
3. The learned advocates for the State and the de facto complainant oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail.
4. Perused the statement of the victim recorded by the Judicial Magistrate and the contents thereof. There are sufficient materials to reject the prayer for pre-arrest bail. The relationship between the parties is that of teacher and student. The petitioner had control and authority over the victim.
5. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail, being CRM (A) 483 of 2026 is rejected and disposed of.
6. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Shampa Sarkar, J.)