Tinku Bhowmik @ Dipak Bhowmik v. State of West Bengal
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court rejected a bail application filed by Tinku Bhowmik accused of raping a child under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO. After observing the victim's evidence and delay in disclosing the incident, the Court denied bail and directed the trial court to conclude the trial within six months.
What did the court decide?
Bail application rejected; trial directed to be concluded within six months.
What the court decided
13.07.2022 36 sdas rejected
C.R.M.(DB) No. 2274 of 2022
In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Bidhannagar (Women) Police Station Case No. 25 of 2021 dated 05.09.2021 under Section 376(2)(f)(i)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of POCSO Act.
And
In Re : Tinku Bhowmik @ Dipak Bhowmik ….. petitioner
Mr. Sourav Chatterjee Mr. Gopal Das Mr. Aditya Tiwari Ms. Namrata Chatterjee … for the petitioner
Ms. Zareen N. Khan Mr. Ashok Das … for the State
Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for 310 days. It is further submitted that alleged incident is false. There is discrepancy with regard to the date of disclosure of the incident to the parents.
Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
We have considered the materials on record including the evidence of the victim recorded during trial. She has categorically implicated the petitioner in the crime. Petitioner is a relation of the victim. Failure to promptly disclose the incident and/or delay in lodging F.I.R. may be prompted on the score of close relationship between the parties.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of an offence under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act considering the delay in disclosure.
Whether the six-month time limit imposed for concluding the trial will result in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution.
Whether the impugned order rejecting bail and directing summary trial is sustainable in law.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Tinku Bhowmik @ Dipak Bhowmik
- respondent
State
Coram
Ananya Bandyopadhyay
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Calcutta HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRM (DB)/2274/2022
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court