M/L20 13.07.2026 Bpg. C.R.M. (M) 1003 of 2026 In Re: An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Purulia (T) Police Station Case No.186 of 2024 dated 12.08.2024 under Sections 137(2)/140(3)/140(1)/115(2)/118(2)/109/351(3)/64(2)(m)/70(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act; Sk Sahid @ Sk Shakil Versus The State of West Bengal & Anr. Mr. Sourav Chatterjee Mr. Sougata Mitra Ms. Soma Chakraborty Mr. Nikhil Gupta Mr. Subhadeep Maitra. …for the petitioner. Mr. Rajendra Banerjee Mr. Anurag Sardar. …for the State. Learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 13th August, 2024 and so far as the present petitioner is concerned, his locus is different from the other accused persons. Emphasis has been made by the petitioner on the fact that the name of the petitioner do not appear from the statement of the injured victim which was recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate. However, because of cryptic reflection, his name in some of the statements under Section 180 of the BNSS, he is compelled to be in custody for 1 year 11 months. Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the 2 prayer for bail and has drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of one of the victim as well as her father. Having considered that the victim is a rustic lady working as a maid servant and is not in a position to make a composed disclosure, at this stage, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Petitioner would renew his prayer for bail after the evidence of the three victims are concerned. Learned trial court has already framed charge. Presumably, within a period of four months, steps be taken to overcome the deposition of these three witnesses by the learned trial court. To that effect, if required, there has been preponement of recording of evidence of such witnesses. At this stage, the prayer for bail of the petitioner in CRM(M)1003 of 2026 is rejected. Memo of Evidence and report submitted by the State be kept with the record. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)