Tariful Purkait@Tarikul Purkait@Tarikul v. State Of West Bengal

16.08.2023 Sl. No.33 akd [Rejected] C. R. M. (DB) 3037 of 2023 In Re: An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 25.07.2023 in connection with Baruipur (Women) Police Station Case No.136 dated 02.11.2022 under Sections 376(2)(n)/376(3)/354C/506 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 6/15 of the POCSO Act.

And In Re: Tariful Purkait @ Tarikul Purkait @ Tarikul ... ... Petitioner Ms. Monami Mukherjee ... ... for the petitioner Mr. Angshuman Chakraborty ... ... for the de-facto complainant Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee .. ld. Public Prosecutor Mr. Neguive Ahmed .. ld. Addl. Public Prosecutor Ms. Trina Mitra ... ... for the State

1. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is in custody for about 275 days. It is further submitted there was a romantic relationship between the parties. Accordingly, he prays for bail.

2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail.

3. Learned Advocate for the de-facto complainant also opposes the prayer for bail and submits petitioner is a married person. He dishonestly cohabited with the victim. He also took obscene pictures and blackmailed her.

4. In rebuttal, it is contended obscene pictures have not been recovered from the mobile phone of the petitioner.

5. We have considered the materials on record. Petitioner is a married person. He dishonestly cohabited with the victim. Obscene pictures have been recovered in course of investigation which corroborate the allegation of blackmail. Under such circumstances, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

6. The application for bail is thus rejected. (Gaurang Kanth, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)