Sekhar Mondal @ Nayan Mondal v. The State Of West Bengal And ANR

10.07.2025 Item no.10 Court No.42 ss (Dismissed)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CRM (DB) 656 of 2025 In re : An Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Spl. ST Case No.49 of 2022 (Spl.185/2021) arising out Kolkata Leather Complex Connection Police Station Case No.126 of dated 02.12.2021 under Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act & charge sheet submitted under section 376(2)(f)(i)/506 of the Indian Penal Code, pending before the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Special Court, POCSO, Baruipur, South 24Parganas. -AndIn the matter of : Sekhar Mondal @ Nayan Mondal ... ... Petitioner Mr. Snehasis Sutradhar, Mr. Ranajit Bera ... ... For the Petitioner Ms. Shalia Afrin, Ms. Purnima Ghosh ... ...For the State Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that out of family dispute the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. There are no such notable injuries. The petitioner is in custody for last 2 years. He seeks for enlargement of the petitioner on bail.

Opposing such prayer for bail, learned Advocate for the State submits that the victim has consistently implicated the petitioner of penetrative sexual assault upon her before the Magistrate as well as during her examination in court. Two witnesses remain to be examined. She seeks for dismissal of the bail application.

Despite service none appears on behalf of the de facto complainant.

Perused the case diary and materials on record. The victim at the time of incident was 9 years of age. In her statement the victim has implicated this petitioner which has also been stated by her during examination in court. Considering the above materials and bearing in mind nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the bail prayer of the petitioner is rejected. The learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial to the fullest and conclude the trial at an early date without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. The application for bail being CRM (DB) 656 of 2025 stands dismissed.

(Bivas Pattanayak, J.)