Imran Khan @ Md. Imran Khan v. The State Of West Bengal And ANR

03.03.2025 ML-13 Court No.26 CRM (DB) 4290 of 2024 (Bail Rejected) (AD) In re : An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Special Case No.307 of 2023 [Special ST No.09(01)2024] arising out of Nadial Police Station Case No.168 of 2023 dated 06.10.2023 under Sections 376/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, pending before the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas cum the Learned Judge, Special Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas. -AndIn the matter of : Imran Khan @ Md. Imran Khan ... ...Petitioner Mr. Soumya Nag, Advocate Mr. Aditya Tewari, Advocate Ms. Namrata Chatterjee, Advocate Mr. Rajdeep Sengupta, Advocate ... ... For the Petitioner Mr. Iqbal Kabir, Advocate Mr. Sandip Kundu, Advocate ... ...For the State Mr. Sobhan Gani, Advocate Mr. Md. Aqib Badr, Advocate Mr. Shakti Shivam, Advocate ... ... For the de facto complainant 1.

Trial is in progress.

2.

Victim is a minor, became pregnant and delivered a child. 3.

Deposition of the victim girl implicates the petitioner in penetrative sexual assault.

4.

Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner invites us to evaluate the evidence led at the trial in order to grant bail. It is at his instances that we proceed to do so. 5.

It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that since the victim did not undertake medico-legal examination, the

version of the prosecution should not be accepted. It is also contended that, the time line spoken of by the victim also does not establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt as against the petitioner.

6.

With respect, we are unable to accept both the contentions. 7.

Trial is yet to be concluded.

8.

Evidence requires reevaluation on completion of the trial. 9.

As the materials stands today at the trial, a minor who implicates the petitioner in penetrative sexual assault.

10. The statement of the victim, if found reliable, is sufficient to convict the accused.

11. Medico-legal examination report may not be necessary in order to convict an accused if the testimony of the victim is accepted by the Court.

12. Similarly on the same parameters, minor aberrations as to the time line of the offence is of no consequence, when the criminal acts itself stands established.

13. In such circumstances, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

14. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

15. CRM (DB) 4290 of 2024 is dismissed.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)