Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 483
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 120B, 366A, 370, 370A, 372, 373
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ss. 6, 17, 21
- Immoral Traffic Prevention Act ss. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Key paragraphs
- Para 1111. The application for bail being CRM (M) 1402 of 2025 stands dismissed. (Bivas Pattanayak, J.)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA. CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CRM (M) 1402 of 2025 In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Jagaddal Police Station Case No. 323 of 2023, dated 10.08.2023 under Sections 120B/366A/370/370A/372/373 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 6/17/21 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 3/4/5/6/7 of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, now pending before the learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Barrackpore. -And- In the matter of : Sourav Kona … … Petitioner Ms. Minoti Gomes Mr. Debabrata Chatterjee, Ms. Baishakhi Chatterjee … … For the Petitioner … …For the State
Service report filed by the State is taken on record.
Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that none of the victims have implicated this petitioner, who is in custody for about one year and eleven months. She seeks for enlargement of the petitioner on bail.
Opposing such prayer for bail, learned advocate for the State submits that there are specific allegations against the petitioner of trafficking and putting the victim prostitution. He seeks for dismissal of the bail application.
Despite service, none appears on behalf of the victim.
Perused the case diary and materials on record. 2
The statement of the victim clearly implicates this petitioner of forcibly putting her into prostitution. Considering the prima facie incriminating materials, the implication of the victim as well as the nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the bail prayer is rejected.
Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial with fullest extent and conclude the same at an early date without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.
The prosecution is directed to produce witnesses as per schedule fixed by the trial court for examination of witnesses.
The parties are directed to cooperate in the trial for examination of the witnesses.
The application for bail being CRM (M) 1402 of 2025 stands dismissed. (Bivas Pattanayak, 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.