Dismissed¶17

Hannan Sk v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC13 Jul 2026CRM(M)/1056/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Calcutta High Court; CRM (M) 1056 of 2026; Hannan Sk v. State; bail rejected under S.439 CrPC/S.483 BNSS; Sagarpara PS Case No. 354 of 2022; Sections 448/376AB/376(I) IPC 1860; Section 6 POCSO Act 2012; Case No. C. Special 02 of 2023; custody 3 years 6 months; trial delay (6 of 18 witnesses examined); medicolegal report corroborates victim evidence; Tirthankar Ghosh, J.; decided 13.07.2026.

What did the court decide?

The medicolegal examination report and the evidence of the victim corroborate each other; the primary accusations against the petitioner stand fortified by the victim. ¶14

Hannan Sk Vs State of West Bengal and Anr. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2026)

¶1

13.07.2026

¶2

Serial no. 25 [ G.S.D ]

¶3

CRM (M) 1056 of 2026

¶4

In re : An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 in connection with Sagarpara PS Case No. 354 of 2022 dated 25^th December, 2022 u/s 448/376AB/376(I) of the IPC, 1860 and u/s 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 relating to Case No. C. Special 02 of 2023.

¶5

-And-

¶6

In the matter of : Hannan Sk

¶7

Mr. Arnab Chatterjee Mr. Avik Ghosh Mr. Satarup Purkayastha Mr. Arnab Sau

¶8

… Petitioner(s) … for the Petitioner(s) … for the State-respondent(s)

¶9

Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for three years six months and till date out of the 18 witnesses cited in the charge-sheet only six witnesses have been examined. Learned advocate, as such, prays that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and produces the medicolegal examination report as well as the other materials appearing in the case diary.

¶11

The evidence of the victim has also been enclosed along with the bail application.

¶12

I have considered the medicolegal examination report as well as the evidence of the victim and I find that both the report and the evidence is corroborating each

¶13

¶14

other. As such, the primary accusations against the present petitioner have been fortified by the victim.

¶15

Regard being had to the same, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶16

Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is Rejected.

¶17

Accordingly, CRM (M) 1056 of 2026 is dismissed.

¶18

Report submitted in respect of the service being effected upon the private opposite party be kept with the record.

¶19