Serajul Haque @ Sirajul Miya Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2024)

Serajul Haque @ Sirajul Miya Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted: release on furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one local) to the satisfaction of the learned Judge, POCSO Court, 2nd Court, Cooch Behar, subject to appearance before the Trial Court on every hearing date, no intimidation of witnesses or tampering with evidence, no commission of similar offences, and no entry into the police-station jurisdiction where the victim resides; on breach, the trial court may cancel bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, Serajul Haque @ Sirajul Miya — in custody for 92 days with the charge-sheet submitted in Pundibari Police Station Case No. 663 of 2024 (Sections 137(2)/140(3)/49 BNS 2023; added Section 8 POCSO Act 2012) — should be released on bail under Section 483 of the BNSS 2023.

Court's answer

Considering the materials available in the C.D., including the victim's Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement and the medical report, the Court held that further detention of the petitioner would not serve any purpose.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Judge, POCSO Court, 2nd Court, Cooch Behar.

Key takeaways

Bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioner shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every date of hearing until further order, shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever, and shall not commit similar offences in future.ratio¶15
An additional condition imposed is that the petitioner will not enter the jurisdiction of the police station within which the victim resides.ratio¶15
If the petitioner fails to comply with the imposed conditions, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail under S. 483 BNSS 2023 granted by the Calcutta High Court (Circuit Bench, Jalpaiguri) on 25.11.2024 to Serajul Haque @ Sirajul Miya, then in custody for 92 days with the charge-sheet submitted, in Pundibari Police Station Case No. 663 of 2024 dated 25.08.2024 (Ss. 137(2)/140(3)/49 BNS 2023; added S. 8 POCSO Act 2012). Considering the C.D., the victim's S. 164 Cr.P.C. statement and the medical report, the Bench (Partha Sarathi Chatterjee and Shampa Sarkar, JJ.) held that further detention would serve no purpose and released the petitioner on a bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one local) to the satisfaction of the Judge, POCSO Court, 2nd Court, Cooch Behar, conditioned on attendance at every hearing date, abstention from intimidating witnesses or tampering with evidence, abstention from similar offences, and exclusion from the police-station jurisdiction where the victim resides; on breach, the trial court may cancel bail without further reference to the High Court. Counsel for the de facto complainant had objected on the ground that enlarging a married person would send a wrong signal to society; no trafficking section had been invoked against the petitioner.

25.11.2024 Ct. No. 01 SL No. 88 Cp

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI

CRM (DB) No. 579 of 2024

In Re: - An application for bail under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. 2023 in connection with Pundibari Police Station Case No. 663 of 2024 dated 25.08.2024 under Sections 137(2)/140(3)/49 of the B. N.S., 2023 and added Section 8 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

And

In the matter of: Serajul Haque @ Sirajul Miya

Mr. Surajit Basu Mr. Debajit Kundu Ms. R. Chakraborty

… for the petitioner Mr. Nilay Chakraborty Mr. Aniruddha Biswas …for the State Ms. Panchali Deb Nag Sikdar Mr. Shubhankar Dutt

…….for the de facto complainant.

Learned advocate for the petitioner prays for bail. He submits that no section for trafficking of the alleged victim has been invoked by the prosecution. He further submits that the present petitioner has been falsely implicated. The petitioner is in custody for 92 days. Charge-sheet has been submitted.

Learned advocate for the State produces the C.D. and vehemently opposes the prayer for bail.

Learned advocate for the de facto complainant also strongly objects to the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is a married person and if such person is enlarged on bail, a wrong signal will be sent to the society.

2

Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the materials on record. Considering the materials available in the CD including the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. as well as the medical report, we are of the view that further detention of the petitioner will not serve any purpose.

Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of learned Judge, POCSO Court, 2^nd Court, Cooch Behar, subject to the condition that petitioner shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every date of hearing until further order and shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever or commit similar offences in future. The petitioner will not enter the jurisdiction of the police station within which the victim resides.

In the event the petitioner fails to comply with the conditions as enshrined hereinabove, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court.

The application for bail is, thus, allowed and disposed of.

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.) (Shampa Sarkar, J.)