15.09.2026 Court No.35. M/L.196. Rakib (Partly Allowed) CRM (A) 2808 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kaliachak Police Station case no. 1941 of 2025 dated 18.11.2025 under Sections 126(2)/115(2)/64/351(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 read with Sections 9/10/11 of the Child Marriage Act, 2006. And In the matter of : Petitioner no.1 & Ors. ……Petitioners. Mr. Md. Wasim Akram Ms. Sabrina Parveen ......for the Petitioners. Mr. Subhajit Chatterjee Mr. Shoumilya Mazumder ……for the State. Mr. Hamidul Haque Mr. Anwar Hossain ......for the De-facto complainant. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submit that petitioner no.1 is the principal accused and petitioner nos.4 and 6 are the parents. Petitioner nos. 2, 3, 5 and 7 are other relations. I have taken into account the statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS as produced by the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the State. Learned advocate for the de-facto complainant do not oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail. Having considered the position of law, so far as the prayer for anticipatory bail is concerned, the prayer for anticipatory bail in respect of petitioner nos. 1, 4 and 6 is rejected. 2 So far as the other petitioners are concerned, being petitioner nos. 2, 3, 5 and 7, their prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed. As such, in the event of arrest, the petitioner nos. 2, 3, 5 and 7 shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer on such terms and conditions as he deems fit and proper subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Since, charge-sheet has already been submitted before the jurisdictional Court this order of anticipatory bail of petitioner nos. 2, 3, 5 and 7 shall remain in force for a period of six weeks from date. With the aforesaid observations, CRM (A) 2808 of 2026 is partly allowed. However, having regard to the fact that the learned jurisdictional Court in case of surrender of other petitioners, would take into account the version of the victim afresh and thereafter consider their liberty in the background of social ramification. Memo of evidence submitted by the State be kept with the record. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)