28.08.2026 Serial no. 03 [Srimanta] Ct. No. – 39 Rejected CRM (A) 1916 of 2026 In re : An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Special Case No. 41/2026 arising out of Gangarampur Police Station Case No. 122/2026 dated 01.03.2026 under Sections 126(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act read with Sections 9/10 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 pending before the Court of the Learned Judge, Special Court, under POCSO Act Gangarampur at Buniadpur, Dakshin Dinajpur. -And- In the matter of : GOPAL GHOSH … … Petitioner. Mr. Sanjoy Bardhan, Mr. Kaushik Choudhury, Mr. Dwaipayan Panda, Advocates … … For the Petitioner. Mr. Kallol Mondal, Mr. Suraj Mishra, Advocates … …For the State. Ms. Busra Khatun, Md. Kashif Alam, Advocates ……For the De Facto Complainant. 1. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the present petitioner is innocent. With consent of the parents of the victim, their marriage was solemnized as per Hindu rites and customs. She was staying in the matrimonial home, and was recovered from there after three days. So, there was no forceful sexual intercourse with her. It is further submitted that charge- sheet has already been submitted. The custodial 2 interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. He prays for anticipatory bail on any terms and conditions. 2. Learned Advocate appearing for the victim through her grandmother raised no objection of prayer of anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor produces the case diary as well as Memo of Evidence and opposes the prayer for bail and submits that she was forcibly made to marry by the parents. The parents are also accused in this case. Her age is 14 years, the Petitioner No. 1 forced her into a sexual relationship. Medical documents also support the same. 4. Having heard the submission of the respective parties and on perusal of the materials on record, Memo of Evidence and case diary, particularly the FIR, medical documents and statements recorded under section 183 of BNSS, this Court finds that the victim implicated the petitioner as well as the parents. Subsequently, she raised no objection at the time of hearing of application for anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner. 5. Considering the overall materials as well as the seriousness of the offence, and the fact that the victim is 14 years old, this Court thinks, this is not a fit case for allowing anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. The application for anticipatory bail being CRM(A) 1916 of 2026 is, thus, rejected. 7. All concerned parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 8. Concerned Department is directed to supply urgent certified copies of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)