Allowed

Samjay Mirdha v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC23 Feb 2023CRM (DB)/537/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the petitioner, who was in custody for over three years for rape under IPC 376DA and POCSO. Finding he was not present during the incident, the Court granted release subject to bond conditions, surveillance, and appearance requirements.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with Rs. 10,000 bond and two sureties, subject to reporting and residency conditions.

Samjay Mirdha Vs State of West Bengal and Anr. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

23.02.2023 34 sdas allowed

¶2

CRM(DB) No. 537 of 2023

¶3

In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Ekbalpore Police Station Case No. 39 of 2020 dated 07.02.2020 under Section 376DA of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 6/17 of the POCSO Act.

¶4

And

¶5

In Re : Sanjay Mirdha ...… petitioner

¶6

Mr. Deepak Prahladka Ms. Reshmi Khatun ..…for the petitioner Mr. Swapan Banerjee Mrs. Manasi Roy ….. for the State

¶7

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits he is in custody for more than three years. It is also submitted he is not the principal offender and was not present at the time of the incident. He prays for bail.

¶8

Learned Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the offence was committed in the room belonging to the petitioner.

¶9

We have considered the materials on record. Though the room is said to belong to the petitioner, he was not present when the incident occurred. Whether he shared common intention with co-accuseds to commit rape requires to be assessed during trial. Vulnerable witness i.e. the victim has already been examined. Keeping in mind the extent of complicity of the petitioner and the

¶10

¶11

period of detention suffered by him, we are inclined to grant bail to him.

¶12

Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2^nd Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas, on further conditions that while on bail the petitioner shall not enter into the jurisdiction of Ekbalpore Police Station until further orders except for the purpose of attending court proceeding and shall provide the address where he shall presently reside to the investigating agency and court below and shall report to the Officer in Charge of the Ekbalpore Police Station once in a week until further orders. Petitioner shall appear before the trial court on every date of hearing until further orders and shall not intimidate the witnesses and/or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

In the event the petitioner fails to appear before the trial court without justifiable cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court.

¶14

The application for bail is, accordingly, allowed.

¶15

(Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

Samjay Mirdha v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samjay Mirdha v. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Humayun Sk @ Humayan Seikh Vs State of West Bengal

Selim Sk @ Selim @ Jahangir Selim Vs State of West Bengal

MD Taslim Sk Vs State of West Bengal

MD Abdul Malek Vs State of West Bengal

Bishnupada Mishra Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sukanta Deb Vs Central Bureau of Investigation