Allowed

Chhoton Bittel v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC8 Oct 2020CRM/7593/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by Chhoton Bittel in a case involving Sections 376 IPC and Section 8 POCSO. The judge held that custodial interrogation was not necessary and granted bail subject to conditions regarding the bond, sureties, jurisdiction, and meetings with the Investigating Officer.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail allowed on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties; petitioner directed not to leave Kandi Police Station jurisdiction and to meet I.O weekly.

Chhoton Bittel Vs State of West Bengal — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

08.10.2020 SL No.31 Court No.10 (sd) (Allowed)

¶2

CRM 7593 of 2020

¶3

(Through Video Conference)

¶4

In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with C. Spl Case No. 38 /2020 arising out of Kandi P.S. Case No. 405/2020 dated 17.09.2020 under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act. And

¶5

In the matter of: Chhoton Bittel ….Petitioner. Mr. S. Adhikary …for the Petitioner. Ms. F. Gossain Ms. B. Basu …for the State.

¶6

The petitioner undertakes to affirm and stamp the petition/application as per Rules within one month of resumption of normal functioning of the Court. Subject to such undertaking, the application is taken up for hearing through video conference.

¶7

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there was a love relationship between the petitioner and the victim and due to the dispute between the two families, the petitioner has been falsely implicated.

¶8

The learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail. It is submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.p.c has implicated the petitioner. However, it has been frankly submitted that the victim had denied medical examination.

¶9

¶10

Having considered the materials on record as well as the extent of complicity of the petitioner in the commission of alleged offence, we are of the opinion that the custodial interrogation is not necessary. Accordingly, we allow the anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶11

In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) together with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶12

The application for anticipatory bail being CRM 7593 of 2020 is allowed.

¶13

It is further directed that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Kandi Police Station until further order and will meet the I.O of the case once in a week.

¶14

All parties are to act on a website copy of this order on the usual undertaking.

¶15

(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)

¶16

(Soumen Sen, J.)

Chhoton Bittel v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhoton Bittel v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

MD Kamaluddin Baidya Vs Abid Hussain

Manas Ari Vs State of West Bengal

Biplab Mondal @ Biplab Kr. Mondal & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal

State of West Bengal and Ors. Vs Bharti Airtel Ltd.

Rajesh Roy Vs State of West Bengal

Prabir Nayek Vs State of West Bengal