Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 34225 (CAL)

TAMA DAS v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR

CRM (A)/2410/2026 · 2026-08-21

Md Shabbar Rashidi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

21.08.2026 DL-3 Court No.551 [Bench ID-266058] (AD) (Rejected) In the High Court at Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side C.R.M. (A) 2410 of 2026 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Special Case No.92 of 2026 arising out of Habra Police Station Case No.213 of 2026 dated 26.04.2026 under Sections 65(1)/351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 6/17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 pending before the Court of the Learned Judge (Special Court, POCSO) at Barasat, North 24 Parganas. And In the matter of: Tama Das ….petitioner Mr. Susnigdho Bhattacharyya, Advocate Mr. Santa Bhattacharyya, Advocate Ms. Sarmistha De, Advocate …for the petitioner Mr. Rajdeep Biswas, Advocate Mr. Suman Chakraborty, Advocate … for the State 1. Memo of evidence and the report submitted by the learned Advocate appearing for the State be taken on record. 2. It appears from the report that the de facto complainant has been served. None appears on behalf of the de facto complainant despite such service. 3. Upon hearing the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Advocate appearing for the State and on perusal of the materials in the case diary, it transpires that the brother of the present petitioner is able to commit rape upon the victim girl. From the medical reports as well as the statement of the victim girl which squarely implicates the present petitioner in the incident. Chare sheet has been submitted. 4. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the 2 case as well as the nature of allegations and the gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. 6. C.R.M. (A) 2410 of 2026 is dismissed. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.) ABHIJIT DAS Digitally signed by ABHIJIT DAS Date: 2026.08.21 17:16:20 +05'30'