25.08.2026 Sl. No. 4 Court No.551 Rohan (Rejected) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M.(A) 2408 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Shibpur Police Station Case No. 205 of 2026 dated 15.05.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2)/115(2)/74/351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Sections 8/12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. -And- In the matter of: Md. Ansh @ Md. Anshu Sek …Petitioner Mr. Sandip Chakraborty Mr. Kaustav Das Ms. Payel Das …for the Petitioner Mr. Gurudas Mitra Mr. Utsav Dutta …for the State Mr. Atindranath Misra … for the Opposite Party No. 2 1. Memo of evidence submitted be kept with the record. 2. The present petitioner is alleged to have forcefully taken the victim to a lonely place and showed her photographs with the petitioner and thereafter, she was brutally assaulted by the petitioner. 3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned advocate for the petitioner further submits that in terms of the provisions contained in Section 19 of the POCSO Act, the penal sections of 2 the POCSO Act is attracted as against the de facto complainant herself which provides for a punishment of six months. He also submits that notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS has not been served upon the present petitioner. Therefore, he prays for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned advocate appearing for the State relies upon the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS together with that under Section 180 thereof. 5. Learned advocate appearing for the de-facto complainant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. 6. Having heard the rival submissions and on perusal of the materials in the case diary, it transpires that this is a case under Section 126(2)/115(2)/74/351(2) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 8/12 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 7. According to the allegations made in the FIR, the petitioner was in a relationship with the victim when she was a minor. The statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS implicates the petitioner for inappropriately touching the victim and thereafter, the victim was assaulted by the present petitioner. 8. In consideration of the aforesaid materials and the nature of allegations made against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 9. At this stage, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. 3 10. With the aforesaid observations, CRM (A) 2408 of 2026 is dismissed. 11. All parties shall act in terms of the server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)