Mira Barman Roy And ANR. v. State Of West Bengal

AD 11 February 24, 2026 Ct. 28 SG CRM(A) 17 of 2026 Reject An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Gangarampur P.S. Case No.431 of 2024 dated 19.08.2024 under Sections 137(2)/140(3)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

And In the matter of: Mira Barman Roy and another ... petitioners Mr. S.N. Mukherjee Ms. Manisha Paswan ... for the petitioners Mr. Sanjoy Bardhan Ms. Pritha Paul ... for the State Mr. Kaushik Choudhury Mr. Dwaipayan Panda ... for the de facto complainant Report filed by the State is taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No.1 is the mother of the principal accused and the petitioner No.2 is a neighbour. The principal accused being a minor was granted bail. The petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case.

Learned counsel for the de facto complainant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the girl was recovered from Haryana. She was only 13 years old. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail, relies on the report and points to the

statements of the victim recorded before the learned Magistrate as present in the case diary and statements of other witnesses.

It appears that the 13 year old daughter was recovered by the police from the house where the petitioners and the principal accused were staying. In her statement recorded before the learned Magistrate, she stated that the present petitioners confined her in the house and the principal accused had forced himself upon her at that place. Considering the above and the other incriminating materials available in the case diary, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, rejected. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of requisite formalities.

[ (Jay Sengupta, J.)