Hossain Mondal @ Hasan Mondal Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2025)

Hossain Mondal @ Hasan Mondal Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: in the event of arrest, release on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one local) to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC 1973 / Section 482(2) BNSS 2023, a bar on threatening or intimidating witnesses, and surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Court with a prayer for bail within four weeks.

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS should be granted to the applicant sought in connection with Domkol PS Case No. 70 of 2025 dated 25.01.2025 (S.62(m) BNS 2023; S.6 POCSO Act), notwithstanding the State's opposition relying on the victim's statement and the injury report.

Court's answer

The Court was inclined to grant anticipatory bail considering the delay in lodging the FIR, the victim's statement giving an inkling that there was some kind of a relationship between the two for some time which allegedly ended in an unfortunate manner, and the fact that a charge sheet has been submitted.

Ratio / Principle

The application for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is allowed.

Key takeaways

In the event of arrest, the petitioner is to 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 Arresting Officer.ratio¶10
Release is subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, corresponding to Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.ratio¶10
On further conditions, the petitioner shall not threaten or intimidate witnesses and shall surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Court and pray for bail within four weeks from the date of the order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS granted to the applicant arraigned in Domkol PS Case No. 70 of 2025 dated 25.01.2025 (S.62(m) BNS 2023; S.6 POCSO Act), notwithstanding the State's opposition resting on the victim's statement and injury report. The Court weighed the delay in lodging the FIR (counsel stating the alleged incident was on 30.12.2024 while the FIR was lodged on 25.01.2025), the victim's statement giving an inkling of a prior relationship between the parties which allegedly ended in an unfortunate manner, and the submission of the charge sheet. On arrest, release upon a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one local) to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer; conditions per S.438(2) CrPC 1973 corresponding to S.482(2) BNSS 2023; petitioner not to threaten or intimidate witnesses and to surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Court and pray for bail within four weeks.

24.11.2025 Court No.28 Item No.10 ssi

CRM (A) 3189 of 2025

In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Suraksha Nagarik Sanhita in connection with Domkol PS Case No. 70 of 2025 dated 25.01.2025 under Sections 62 (m) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

And In the matter of: Hossain Mondal @ Hasan Mondal ….Applicant/Petitioner. Mr. Jaydeep Biswas Mr. Amanul Islam Mr. Sourav Mukherjee Mr. Kaushik Ghosh Mr. Gourav Roy …for the petitioner Ms. Sayanti Santra Mr. Prakash Mishra ..for the State Report filed on behalf of the State is taken on record. Despite service, no one appears on behalf of the de facto complainant.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The talk of marriage between the petitioner and the de facto complainant did not fructify. Thereafter, they two entered into a relationship, which turned sour later on. Without disclosing the fact that the de facto complainant had earlier lodged an application before the learned Magistrate, the present FIR was registered. Later, the two complaints were amalgamated. Although, the incident allegedly occurred in 30.12.2024, the FIR was lodged on 25.01.2025.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. She relies on the statement of the 17 years old victim and the injury report.

2

Considering the delay in lodging the FIR, the statement of the victim giving an inkling that there was some kind of a relationship between the two for some time which, although, ended allegedly in an unfortunate manner and the fact that a charge sheet has been submitted, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is allowed.

In the event of arrest, 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 Arresting Officer and also be subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023 and on further conditions that the petitioner shall not threaten or intimidate witnesses and shall surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Court and pray for bail within four weeks from this date.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)