Allowed

Rishab Mandal (Minor) v. the State

Calcutta HC20 Dec 2021CRM/17/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application for bail, the High Court at Calcutta (Circuit Bench at Port Blair) granted release to a 17-year-old petitioner accused of offenses under POCSO and IPC, subject to strict conditions of local-bound supervision and investigation cooperation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with Rs.20,000 bond, two registered sureties, and conditions to stay in Havelock Islands, meet police twice a week, and cooperate with investigation.

Rishab Mandal (Minor) Vs the State — Calcutta HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ]

¶2

…

¶3

CRM/17/2021

¶4

Rishab Mandal (Minor) … Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

The State … Respondent Mr.Deep Chaim Kabir, Mr.Ajith Prasad, Advocates … for the petitioner Ms.A.S.Zinu, Advocate … for the respondent

¶7

December 20, 2021 [GNC] Item No.4

¶8

This is an application for bail in connection with a case under Sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 363 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶9

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is a 17 years old resident of Hut Bay. It was alleged that the petitioner contacted the minor victim girl and wanted to have a relationship. After sometime, they did have a physical relationship. After a few days the victim became acquainted with another person being the adult co-accused in this case and had physical relationship with him as well. While the other accused came to drop him, the father of the minor victim girl saw this. This led to the registration of the First Information Report. Normally, a juvenile in conflict with law is to be released on bail subject, of course, to the proviso contained in Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. The petitioner undertakes to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. If required, the petitioner will stay with his

¶10

¶11

grandfather who resides in Havelock Islands and shall remain in the Havelock Islands under the supervision of his grandfather namely, Shri Prasuram Sikder, except for attending the Court proceedings and meeting the Investigating Officer.

¶12

Learned counsel for the State submits as follows. It appears from the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Code that the accused committed the crime against the will of the minor victim girl and in a preplanned manner, as rightly indicated by the learned Juvenile Justice Board.

¶13

We have heard the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and have perused, among other things, the application and the statements of the victim girl and her relative recorded under Section 164 of the Code and the medical report of the victim girl.

¶14

It appears that the First Information Report was lodged by the victim herself on 8^th December, 2021 at about 21.30 hours. In the said First Information Report the victim girl refers to separate interactions with the two accused including the present petitioner and admits to entering into physical relationships with them. Practically the same version is contained in the medico legal examination of the survivor as given by the victim girl on the same night (08.12.2021) to the doctor who treated her.

¶15

The report further indicates that there was no injury on the private parts of the victim except for the fact that the hymenal orifice was torn.

¶16

However, subsequently on 14^th December, 2021 the victim girl gave out a more serious account of the incidents in her

¶17

¶18

statement recorded before the learned Magistrate under Section 164 of the Code.

¶19

Considering the nature of the allegations and the immediate stand taken by the victim girl in the First Information Report and during her medical examination and in view of the detention already undergone by the petitioner and considering his age, as claimed, we are inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

¶20

Let the petitioner be released on bail subject to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Port Blair subject to the furnishing of bond of Rs.20,000/- with two registered sureties of like amount each on the conditions that –

¶21

I. The petitioner shall not leave the Havelock Islands except for attending the Court proceedings and meeting the Investigating Officer of the case until further orders and shall cooperate with the investigation of the case;

¶22

II. The petitioner shall meet the Station House Officer, Havelock Police Station twice a week till the completion of investigation.

¶23

In the event of violation of any condition of bail by the petitioner, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail without any reference to this Court.

¶24

CRM/17/2021 is disposed of.

¶25

¶26

Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties, forthwith upon compliance of usual

¶27

formalities.

¶28

(Debangsu Basak, J. )

¶29

(Jay Sengupta, J. )

Rishab Mandal (Minor) v. the State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishab Mandal (Minor) v. the State

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

Dr U N Choudhary Vs the Union of India and Others

The Lieutenant Governor and Others Vs Hotel Seashell and Another

The Lieutenant Governor and Ors. Vs Hotel Seashell

Kartick Saha Vs the State

Andaman and Nicobar State Cooperative Bank Limited Vs the Andaman and Nicobar Administration and Ors.

Andaman and Nicobar State Cooperative Bank Limited and Anr. Vs the Andaman and Nicobar Administration and Ors.