Ayan Purkait v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

10.07.2025 SL No.41 Court No.32 S.Gayen

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M.(A) 1988 of 2025 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Special Case No. 45 of 2024 arising out of Survey Park Police Station Case No. 28 of 2024 dated 01.02.2025 under Sections 376/305/34 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

-AndIn the matter of: Ayan Purkait

...Petitioner

Mr. Sabir Ahmed Mr. Tashim Ahmed Mr. Quazi Ezaz Ahmed ...for the Petitioner Mr. Soumik Ganguly Ms. Sonali Bhar ...for the State Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay Ms. Sadia Parveen Ms. Bidisha Chakraborty ...for the de facto complainant

1. This instant application has been filed with a prayer for anticipatory bail.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that there was a love affair between the victim and the petitioner and it was within the knowledge of the family of the victim. It is further submitted that during investigation nothing was revealed regarding commission of any offence within the meaning of any of the provisions of the POCSO Act. It is further

submitted that the petitioner had no role to play in committing of suicide by the victim and also the fact that the chargesheet has already been filed in connection with the instant case.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de facto complainant has submitted that the victim was a minor girl and the mother of the petitioner is a panchayat member of the ruling party.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail prayer and placed his reliance on the documents as well as the statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS.

5. After careful perusal of the entire case diary, I am not inclined to grant any anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is, thus, rejected.

7. As a sequel, the application for anticipatory bail being C.R.M. (A) 1988 of 2025 stands dismissed.

(Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)