Sunil Lobo @ Sunil Victor Lobo v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

04.08.2025 Court No.28 Item No.41 ssi CRM (A) 2426 of 2025 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Suraksha Nagarik Sanhita in connection with Asansol Women PS Case No.32 of 2025 dated 08.03.2025 under Sections 69/351(2) of the BNS, 2023.

And In the matter of: Sunil Lobo @ Sunil Victor Lobo. ....Applicant/Petitioner.

Mr. Milon Mukherjee, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Sabyasachi Banerjee, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Biswajit Manna ...for the petitioner Mr. Dr. Siddhartha Goswami Mr. U. Shaw ..for the de facto Mr. Debashish Roy, Ld. PP Ms. Afreen Begum ..for the State Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.

Vakalatnama filed on behalf of the de facto complainant is also taken on record.

Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is a superintendent of a technical school and is an adorned Christian priest. The petitioner and the alleged victim are working in different schools. They are aged about 40 and 39 years, respectively. It was alleged in the First Information Report that a friendship grew between the two which continued for some time.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de facto complainant vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the petitioner had induced the de facto complainant into a relationship and thereafter refused to marry her. The victim is now being threatened by the petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. She relies on the statements of the victim recorded before the learned Magistrate and other statements as well as the medical report which, however, does not show any injury. Considering the nature of allegations, the materials available in the case diary and the fact that there was some kind of a relationship between the two for a certain length of time, I do not think that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required in this case and I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, considering the allegations of giving of threats, his movement needs to be restricted for a limited period.

In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and also be subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023 and on further conditions that the petitioner shall not threaten or intimidate witnesses and shall cooperate with investigation. The petitioner shall meet the I.O. once a fortnight till submission of report in final form. The petitioner shall stay outside the jurisdiction of Asansol North Police Station for a

period of six months from this date, except for attending Court or meeting the Investigating Officer.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. (Jay Sengupta, J.)