20.04.2026 Sl. No.18 NB CRM (A) 1098 of 2026 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Mothabari PS Case No.840/2025 dated 10.10.2025 under Sections 318(2)/76 of BNS, 2023 and Section 6/12 of POCSO Act. And In the matter of: Md. Nashim Ahamed @ Bished … petitioner Mr. Arup Bhowmik. …for the petitioner. Mr. Saibal Bapuli ld.APP., Mr. Ashok Das. ..for the State. Report filed on behalf of the State is taken on record. Despite service, no one appears on behalf of the de facto complainant. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. After the relationship between the petitioner and the alleged victim turned sour, the FIR was registered. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He refers to the statements of witnesses, including that of the 15 year old victim recorded before the learned Magistrate. It is alleged that the petitioner had entered into a physical relationship with her, videographed such acts and thereafter circulated the same, and finally the video was published on social media. Considering the above and the other incriminating materials available in the case diary, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the present petitioner. 2 The application for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, thus, rejected. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order may be delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all formalities. (Jay Sengupta, J.)