Sunil Haldar v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

29.04.2025 Item no.14 Court No.39 ss (Dismissed)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION C.R.M.(DB) 962 of 2025 In Re:- An application for bail under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with New Barrackpore Police Station Case No.257 of 2024 dated 04.10.2024 under Section 6 of the Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act.

And In Re : Sunil Haldar .... Petitioner Mr. Debasish Kar ....for the petitioners Mr. Arindam Sen Mr. Amanul Islam ..... for the State Service report filed by the State is taken on record. It is found that service has been effected upon the de facto complainant/victim.

Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the landlord and he has been falsely implicated in the proceedings by the tenants for their ulterior gains. The petitioner is aged about 80 years and there are no incriminating materials against the petitioner. He seeks for enlargement of the petitioner on bail.

Opposing such prayer, learned Advocate for the State submits that the victim was aged about three years at the time of incident and has categorically stated of the overt act of the petitioner. He 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. It is found that the victim was aged about 3 years at the time of incident. The victim in her statement before the Magistrate implicates the petitioner of his involvement in the alleged offence, which is also stated by her before the attending doctor during her medical examination. Considering the above materials and the nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the bail prayer is rejected.

The application for bail being CRM (DB) 962 of 2025 stands dismissed.

(Bivas Pattanayak, J.)