Allowed

Saddam Hussain @ Rahit Khan and Anr. v. the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC28 Aug 2023CRM(DB)/470/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Circuit Bench of Calcutta High Court at Jalpaiguri granted bail to petitioner Saddam Hussain and Anr. in a POCSO case involving Sections 363/370 IPC. The court held further detention unnecessary as the victim deposed and investigation concluded, releasing them on ₹10,000 bond with conditions to not tamper with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail upon furnishing ₹10,000 bond each with two sureties, local surety required, restriction on entering police station jurisdiction, attending court dates, and not tampering w

Saddam Hussain @ Rahit Khan and Anr. Vs the… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

CIRCUIT BENCH OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT AT JALPAIGURI APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶2

28.08.2023 Court No.01 Item No.7 P.P./S.D.

¶3

CRM (DB) 470 of 2023

¶4

In Re:- An application for bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure;

¶5

And

¶6

In Re: Saddam Hussain @ Rahit Khan & Anr.

¶7

…Petitioner Ms. Esha Acharya Mr. Sampad Das ….For the petitioner Mr. Abhijit Sarkar Mr. Sourav Ganguly …For the State

¶8

Affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept with the records.

¶9

The present application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred in connection with Falakata Police Station Case No.241 of 2021 dated 28.5.2021 under Sections 363/370(4) of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶10

Ms. Acharya, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated. The petitioner no. 1 is the driver of an Ambulance and the petitioner no. 2 is the helper. The principal accused is one Dibyendu Dey @ Monai, who is still in custody. The petitioners have already suffered long detention since 11.7.2021. The evidence of the victim girl has already been recorded and in

¶11

¶12

the said conspectus, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail on any stringent condition moreso, when upon completion of investigation chargesheet has already been submitted.

¶13

Drawing our attention to the statement of victim girl, as recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, Cr.P.C.), Mr. Sarkar, learned advocate appearing for the State submits that the petitioners have direct nexus with the alleged offence. In view of the incriminating materials on record, the petitioners’ prayer for bail needs to be refused.

¶14

We have perused the statement of the victim girl, as recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. The principal accused is one Dibyendu Dey @ Monai. Considering the extent of complicity of the petitioners in the alleged offence, the period of detention and as the victim girl has already deposed before the learned Court below, we are of the opinion that further detention of the petitioners is not necessary.

¶15

Accordingly, we allow this application and direct that the petitioners, namely, Saddam Hussain @ Rahit Khan and Ganesh Debnath , shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Special Court under POCSO Act, Alipurduar.

¶16

The petitioners shall not enter the jurisdiction of Falakata Police Station. Within a week from date, the petitioners shall intimate the Inspector-in-Charge of Falakata Police Station the address where they would be residing and they shall meet with

¶17

¶18

the Inspector-in-Charge of the police station having jurisdiction over the place where they would be residing, once a week until further orders.

¶19

It is further directed that they shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses and shall attend the learned Court below on all the dates fixed for hearing.

¶20

It is made clear that in the event the conditions as stated above are not complied with, the learned Court below would be at liberty to cancel the petitioners’ bail without any further reference to this Court.

¶21

With the above observations and directions, the application for bail, being C.R.M.(DB) 470 of 2023 is disposed of.

¶22

All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶23

(Lapita Banerji, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)

Saddam Hussain @ Rahit Khan and Anr. v. the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saddam Hussain @ Rahit Khan and Anr. v. the State of West Bengal and Anr.

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

Raju Das Vs the State of West Bengal

Goutam Barman Vs the State of West Bengal

Shainur Bibi @ Sainur Bibi and Anr. Vs the State of West Bengal

Dulu Barman Vs the State of West Bengal

Sahabuddin Ali @ Babu Vs the State of West Bengal

Karan Das Vs State of West Bengal