Raju Malik @ Dalu v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

02.04.2025 Item no.14 Court No.39 srm

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION C.R.M.(DB) 820 of 2025 In Re:- An application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Dhaniakhali Police Station Case No.376 of 2024 dated 17.12.2024 under Sections 329(4)/75 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO);

And In Re : Raju Malik @ Dalu .... Petitioner Mr. Prithwiraj Biswas, Mr. Aniruddha Bhattachriya, Ms. Indrani Das ...for the Petitioner Ms. Sukanya Bhattacharya, Ms. Trisha Rakshit ... for the State Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.

State furnished service report in terms of order dated 25th March, 2025.

It is found that the service have been effected upon the de facto complainant.

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

Mr. Prithwiraj Biswas, learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that there are no such ingredients to attract the offences alleged in the written complaint. The FIR has been

initiated out of political vendetta. He prays for enlargement of the petitioner on bail.

Ms. Sukanya Bhattacharya, learned Advocate for the State submits that the statement of the victim divulge serious allegations against the petitioner of his involvement in the offence. She prays for dismissal of the application. Perused the case diary.

It is found from the statement of the victim that there are serious allegations against the petitioner. Considering the gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. The application for bail being CRM (DB) 820 of 2025 stands dismissed.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of all necessary legal formalities.

(Bivas Pattanayak, J.)