BIPLAB MANDAL@MAHADEB MANDAL v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR
CRM(A)/624/2025 · 2026-01-05
Tirthankar Ghosh
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2884 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2884 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
05.01.2026 Serial no. 1 [G.S.D]
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI
CRM (A) 624 of 2025
In re : An Application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023/under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with Ghoksadanga PS Case No. 324 of 2023 dated 30.06.2023 under sections 363/365/325 of the IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
-And-
In the matter of : Biplab Mandal @ Mahadeb Mandal
… Petitioner(s)
Mr. Sudip Guha
… for the petitioner(s)
Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, ld. APP Mr. Tapan Bhattacharjee Mr. Sagnik Sankar Sikdar
… for the State-respondent(s) Mr. Swapan Bhowmik
… for the defacto- complainant(s)
Learned advocate for the petitioner prays for anticipatory bail on the ground that the provisions of the POCSO Act are not attracted and there has been change of circumstances as there has been marriage between the parties. Learned advocate for the State refers to the FIR which speaks that the incident occurred ten months’ prior to the date of registration of the FIR, consequently, the victim was minor at the relevant stage.
2 The records of the case reflects that earlier the petitioner preferred an application for Anticipatory Bail being CRM(A) 634 of 2023 wherein the prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected by a Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court. Having considered the fact that the Hon’ble Division Bench had the occasion to deal with the issues and the anticipatory bail was rejected on consideration of the case diary, I am not inclined to accede to the prayer of the petitioner. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected. However, if the petitioner appears before the Learned Magistrate with materials to substantiate that there has been change of circumstances, the regular court will consider the prayer for bail taking into account the changed circumstances. Accordingly, CRM(A) 624 of 2025 is dismissed. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)
3