Calcutta High CourtCRM(M)/302/2025rejected

Sima Sinha And ANR. v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

2025-05-16Hon'Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak2 pages

16.05.2025 Item no.5(DL) Court No.39 srm (Rejected)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION C.R.M.(M) 302 of 2025 In Re:- An application for bail under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with ST 3(11)24, SPL Case No.93/2024 arising out of Madhyamgram Police Station Case No.484 of 2024 dated 15.07.2024 under Sections 96/143/98/99/61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 3/4/5/6/7/9 of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956 and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, pending before learned Judge, Special Court POCSO Court, Barasat, North 24-Parganas;

And In Re : Sima Sinha & Anr.

.... Petitioners Mr. Angshuman Chakraborty, Mr. S.S. Saha ...for the Petitioners.

Mr. Iqbal Kabir, Mr. Karan Bapuli ... for the CBI.

Learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that the victim girl No.2 in her deposition has not implicated the petitioners. One of the co-accused has been granted bail by this Hon'ble Court. None of the victim girls has implicated the petitioner No.2 in their statement before the Magistrate. The petitioners are in custody for about one year. He seeks for enlargement of the petitioners on bail.

Learned Advocate for the State submits that the victim girls have been recovered from the place where these petitioners used to carry on the activity of prostitution. The person who has been granted bail is the customer. He seeks for dismissal of the application.

Perused the case diary and the materials on record. The victim No.3 in her statement before the Magistrate implicates the petitioner No.1, who is yet to be examined. The parents of the victim girls have implicated both the petitioners in carrying on such prostitution. Considering such materials and the gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioners is rejected.

The application for bail being CRM (M) 302 of 2025 stands dismissed.

(Bivas Pattanayak, J.)