Md Sahid Ansari @ Naju v. State Of West Bengal

28.03.2022 Serial no.78 [Dd] (Bail Rejected) CRM(DB) 805 of 2022 In re : An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Domjur Police Station Case No. 611 of 2021 dated 07.08.2021 under Sections 448/376(3) of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 4/ 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act [Special T.R. NO. 96 of 2021] subsequently charge sheet submitted under Sections 448/376(3) of IPC read with Sections 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, -AndIn the matter of : Md. Sahid Ansari @ Naju ... ...Petitioner Mr. Sakhawat Khandakar, Advocates ... ... For the Petitioner Mr. Partha Pratim Das, Ms. Manasi Roy, Advocates ... ...For the State Petitioner seeks bail.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for 232 days. The police filed charge sheet and, therefore, further detention of the petitioner is not required. He highlights the respective ages of the victim as well as the petitioner. Learned advocate appearing for the State draws the attention of the Court to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code and materials in the case diary.

The victim squarely implicates the petitioner in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Her statement is somewhat corroborated

of an eye-witness whose statement was recorded under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure.

Considering the gravity of the offence and the involvement of the petitioner therein as transpiring from the materials in the case diary, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

Prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. CRM(DB) 805 of 2022 is dismissed.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)