Dismissed¶20

Ayan Purkait v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC10 Jul 2025CRM (A)/1988/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail dismissed; C.R.M.(A) 1988 of 2025; High Court at Calcutta, Appellate Side, Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction; decided 10.07.2025 by Bibhas Ranjan De, J.; petitioner Ayan Purkait; Section 482 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; Sections 376/305/34 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Section 4 POCSO Act, 2012; Special Case No. 45 of 2024; Survey Park Police Station Case No. 28 of 2024; chargesheet filed; Section 180 BNSS statement; love affair; minor victim; suicide; case diary perused; bail rejected.

What did the court decide?

After careful perusal of the entire case diary, the Court was not inclined to grant any anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner. ¶18

Ayan Purkait Vs State of West Bengal and Anr. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2025)

¶1

10.07.2025 SL No.41 Court No.32 S.Gayen

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE

¶3

C.R.M.(A) 1988 of 2025

¶4

In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Special Case No. 45 of 2024 arising out of Survey Park Police Station Case No. 28 of 2024 dated 01.02.2025 under Sections 376/305/34 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

¶5

-And-

¶6

In the matter of: Ayan Purkait

¶7

…Petitioner

¶8

Mr. Sabir Ahmed Mr. Tashim Ahmed Mr. Quazi Ezaz Ahmed Mr. Soumik Ganguly Ms. Sonali Bhar Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay Ms. Sadia Parveen Ms. Bidisha Chakraborty

¶9

…for the Petitioner

¶10

…for the State

¶11

…for the de facto complainant

¶12

This instant application has been filed with a prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that there was a love affair between the victim and the petitioner and it was within the knowledge of the family of the victim. It is further submitted that during investigation nothing was revealed regarding commission of any offence within the meaning of any of the provisions of the POCSO Act. It is further

¶14

¶15

submitted that the petitioner had no role to play in committing of suicide by the victim and also the fact that the chargesheet has already been filed in connection with the instant case.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de facto complainant has submitted that the victim was a minor girl and the mother of the petitioner is a panchayat member of the ruling party.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail prayer and placed his reliance on the documents as well as the statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS.

¶18

After careful perusal of the entire case diary, I am not inclined to grant any anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner.

¶19

Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is, thus, rejected .

¶20

As a sequel, the application for anticipatory bail being C.R.M. (A) 1988 of 2025 stands dismissed.

¶21

(Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)

Ayan Purkait v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ayan Purkait v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Debarun Das Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Uttam Barman and Anr. Vs the State of West Bengal

Vishal Jaiswal and Others Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Amitosh Biswas Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Sanatan Biswas Vs State of West Bengal

Shyamal Prasad Vs State of West Bengal