DB) No. 1065 of 2023 · Calcutta High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Ms. Minoti Gomes Mr. Musharraf Alam Sk. Ms. Susmita Ghorai … for the petitioner Mr. P. K. Datta, learned APP Mr. Prodipta Kumar Ganguly … for the State Heard the learned Counsels for the parties. We have considered the materials on record. Bail prayer of the petitioner was rejected on merits in September, 2022. In view of the aforesaid fact and gravity of the offence involving penetrative sexual assault on a minor, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The application for bail is, thus, rejected. Trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.) 2
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.