Dismissed¶¶21

Jakir Hossain Sanfui @ Zakir v. the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC25 Aug 2025CRM (DB)/669/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Calcutta High Court bail rejection; CRM (DB) 669 of 2025; Section 439 CrPC; Section 483 BNSS 2023; Sections 376AB/376C IPC; Section 6 POCSO Act; penetrative sexual assault; minor victim aged 5; Jibantala Police Station Case No. 429 dated 25.10.2022; Special Case No. 272/2022; SPL ST No. 16(01)/2023; Special Court & 2nd Additional Sessions Judge Alipore; CSW 16 Investigating Officer attendance; Superintendent of Police Baruipur Police District; expedite trial; Jakir Hossain Sanfui @ Zakir; Bivas Pattanayak J.

What did the court decide?

None; the bail prayer of the petitioner was rejected, with attendant directions for production of witnesses, attendance of CSW 16 and expedition of the trial. ¶¶21

Jakir Hossain Sanfui @ Zakir Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the bail prayer of the petitioner was rejected, with attendant directions for production of witnesses, attendance of CSW 16 and expedition of the trial.

¶¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, charged under Sections 376AB/376C IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act, should be enlarged on bail under Section 439 CrPC / Section 483 BNSS 2023 notwithstanding the victim's consistent implication of him and the gravity of the offence. +1 more

¶¶11

Court's answer

Factual premise of the bail decision: the victim was 5 years of age at the time of the incident, and she implicates the petitioner of penetrative sexual assault both in her statement before the Magistrate and in her deposition in court.

¶¶15

Ratio / Principle

Considering the incriminating materials and bearing in mind the nature and gravity of the offence, the Court was not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶¶15

Key takeaways

The bail prayer of the petitioner was rejected and the application CRM (DB) 669 of 2025 was dismissed.ratio¶¶21
The Superintendent of Police, Baruipur Police District was directed to ensure the attendance of CSW 16, the Investigating Officer, on the scheduled date of his examination.ratio¶¶17
The learned trial court was directed to expedite the trial to the fullest extent, conclude it at an early date, and grant no unnecessary adjournment to either party.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Calcutta High Court (CRM (DB) 669 of 2025, decided 25.08.2025, Bivas Pattanayak, J.) dismissed the bail application under Section 439 CrPC / Section 483 BNSS 2023 of Jakir Hossain Sanfui @ Zakir, facing Sections 376AB/376C IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act charges arising from Jibantala Police Station Case No. 429 dated 25.10.2022 (Special Case No. 272/2022; SPL ST No. 16(01)/2023, before the Special Court & 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Alipore). The victim, aged 5 at the incident, had implicated the petitioner of penetrative sexual assault both in her statement before the Magistrate and in her deposition; weighing these incriminating materials against the nature and gravity of the offence, the Court declined bail. The Court further directed the prosecution to produce witnesses as scheduled, the Superintendent of Police, Baruipur Police District to ensure attendance of CSW 16 (the Investigating Officer), and the trial court to expedite the trial without unnecessary adjournments.

¶1

25.08.2025 Item no.2 Court No.42 ss

¶2

(Dismissed)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION

¶4

CRM (DB) 669 of 2025

¶5

In re : An Application for bail under Section Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Jibantala Police Station Case No. 429 dated 25.10.2022 under Sections 376AB/376C of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of POCSO Act corresponding to Special Case No. 272/2022 and SPL ST No. 16(01)/2023 now pending before the learned Special Court & 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Alipore.

¶6

-And-

¶7

In the matter of : Jakir Hossain Sanfui @ Zakir

¶8

… … Petitioner

¶9

Mr. Mukteswar Maity, Ms. Manika Sarkar … for the petitioner Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Ms. Poulami Basu

¶10

… …For the State Ms. Afreen Begum … for the de facto complainant

¶11

Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in custody for last 3 years without considerable progress in trial. He seeks for enlargement of the petitioner on bail. Certified copy of the deposition filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.

¶12

Opposing such prayer for bail, learned Advocate for the State submits that the prosecution intending to examine ten charge-sheeted witnesses has already examined eight and only CSW 10 and CSW 16 remains to be examined. Further the victim has consistently implicated this petitioner of penetrative sexual assault. Since investigating officer CSW 16 is

¶13

¶14

a vital witness, a direction be issued upon the Superintendent of Police, Baruipur Police District to ensure the attendance of CSW 16 on the scheduled date of his examination. He seeks for dismissal of the bail application.

¶15

Learned Advocate for the de facto complainant also opposes such prayer for bail and submits that there are specific statements of the victim against this petitioner. She also seeks for dismissal of the bail application. 4. Perused the case diary and materials on record. 5. The victim at the time of incident was 5 years of age. The victim in her statement before the Magistrate as well as in her deposition in court implicates this petitioner of penetrative sexual assault. Considering such incriminating materials and bearing in mind nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶16

Accordingly, the bail prayer of the petitioner is rejected. 7. It is informed by the State that CSW 10 and CSW 16 remains to be examined on behalf of the prosecution.

¶17

The prosecution is directed to produce witnesses as per schedule fixed by the trial court for examination of witnesses. 9. Superintendent of Police, Baruipur Police District is directed to ensure the attendance of CSW 16, the Investigating Officer, on the scheduled date of his examination. 10. The learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial to the fullest extent and conclude the trial at an early date without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶18

The parties are directed to cooperate in the trial for examination of the witnesses.

¶19

¶20

Parties are at liberty to communicate this order to the learned trial court.

¶21

The application for bail being CRM (DB) 669 of 2025 stands dismissed.

¶22

( Bivas Pattanayak, J .)

Jakir Hossain Sanfui @ Zakir v. the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jakir Hossain Sanfui @ Zakir v. the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Ziauddin and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Kartick Rajbanshi@Kartik Rajbanshi Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Prolay Mondal Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Indranil Bose Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Ajoy Dhar Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Abir Kumar Sarkar Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.