Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 29606 (CAL)

SUMAN HALDER v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR

CRM (A)/1843/2026 · 2026-07-22

Tirthankar Ghosh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

22.07.2026 Serial no. 689 [G.S.D] CRM (A) 1843 of 2026 In re : An Application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023/under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with POCSO Cse No. C. Spl. 155 of 2025 arising out of Berhampore PS Case No. 1864 of 2025 dated 25.08.2025 u/s 137(2)/140(3)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and 6 of the POCSO Act. -And- In the matter of : Suman Halder … Petitioner(s) Mr. Manas Kr. Das Mr.Mobaidur Hossain Mr. Tushar Sil … for the petitioner(s) Mr. P. Karan Singh … for the State-respondent(s) Mr. Kingsuk Mondal Mr. Suman Das … for the defacto – complainant(s) Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had relationship with the victim and has been subsequently implicated in the instant case on fake accusations. Learned advocate for the defacto-complainant denies such contentions advanced by the petitioner. Learned advocate for the State produces the case diary and draws the attention of the court to the statement of the victim under section 183 of the BNSS as well as the medicolegal examination report. 2 Having considered the materials relied upon by the State, I am not inclined to grant the prayer for anticipatory bail of the present petitioner. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is Rejected. Accordingly, CRM (A) 1843 of 2026 is dismissed. Memo of Evidence submitted be kept with the record. 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.)