C.R.M.(DB) No. 49 of 2024 · Calcutta High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 376(2)(l)(n)
Judgment
Mr. Amit Ranjan Pati Ms. Swastika Chowdhury ….for the petitioner Mr. Binay Kumar Panda Mr. Asraf Mondal …… for the State
1.
Heard the learned Counsels for the parties.
2.
We have considered the materials on record. Victim is a mentally challenged girl. She was repeatedly raped. In view of gravity of the offence and materials on record, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
3.
The application for bail is, thus, rejected. (Gaurang Kanth, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.
This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record.
Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on
Calcutta High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. C.R.M.(DB) No. 49 of 2024).
← Search more judgments