Jayanta Singh Joy v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

24.09.2025 Item No.14 Court No.42 ab

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA.

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CRM (M) 1699 of 2025 In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kotwali Police Station Case No. 596 of 2023, dated 22.06.2023 under Sections 376 (AB) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 6(1) of the POCSO Act, now pending before the Learned Judge, Special Court under POCSO Act at Krishnagar, Nadia. -AndIn the matter of : Jayanta Singh @ Joy ... ... Petitioner Ms. Sayantika Sahu, Mr. Avilash Tripathi ... ... For the Petitioner Mr. Aniket Mitra, Mr. Debanik Das ... ...For the State

1. Service report filed by the State is taken on record.

2. The petitioner renews his prayer for bail.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for about 2 years and 3 months without there being considerable progress in trial. She seeks for enlargement of the petitioner on bail.

4. Opposing such prayer for bail, learned advocate for the State submits that the victim at the time of incident was 5 years of age and she has categorically implicated this petitioner. He informs the Court that 3 out 17 witnesses have already been examined and the trial is under progress. He seeks for dismissal of the bail application.

5. Despite service, none appears on behalf of the de facto complainant.

6. Perused the case diary and materials on record.

7. The victim aged about 5 years implicates this petitioner. The order of the learned Trial Court dated 14th May, 2025 records that there are sufficient materials in the evidence so far produced by the prosecution. Considering the prima facie incriminating materials, the implication of the victim as well as the nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the bail prayer is rejected.

9. The learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial with fullest extent and conclude the same at an early date without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

10. The prosecution is directed to produce witnesses as per schedule fixed by the trial court for examination of witnesses.

11. The parties are directed to cooperate in the trial for examination of the witnesses.

12. The application for bail being CRM (M) 1699 of 2025 stands dismissed.

(Bivas Pattanayak, J.)