Allowed

Jhuma Mudi @ Jhuni Mudi v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC8 Jun 2026CRM (A)/1328/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Granted anticipatory bail to Jhuma Mudi, mother of the principal accused in a POCSO case, finding custodial interrogation unnecessary. Ordered conditions of bail including a Rs.10,000 bond and cooperation with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to standard conditions including cooperation with investigation and no intimidation of witnesses.

Jhuma Mudi @ Jhuni Mudi Vs State of West… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2026)

¶1

08.06.2026 Court No.28 Item No.8 ssi

¶2

CRM (A) 1328 of 2026

¶3

In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in connection with Kharagpur (Local) Police Station Case No. 257 of 2026 dated 18.03.2026 under Sections 137 (2)/140(3)/3(5) of the BNS read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. And In the matter of: Jhuma Mudi @ Jhuni Mudi. …. Petitioner Mr. Navanil De Mr. Srinjan Ghosh …for the petitioner Mr. Pritam Ray Ms. Anushka Ghosh ..for the State

¶4

Leave is granted to amend the cause title. Report filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.

¶5

Despite service, no one appears on behalf of the de facto complainant.

¶6

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is the mother of the principal accused. She had been needlessly and falsely implicated in this case.

¶7

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He refers to the medical report and the victim’s statement recorded before the learned Magistrate where she stated that the principal accused had taken her to a friend’s place and committed the mischief. Later on, his relatives came and beat her up.

¶8

The principal accused is not before this Court.

¶9

¶10

Considering the above, the other materials available in the case diary and the alleged role ascribed to the present petitioner, I do not think that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required in this case and I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶11

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 co-operate with the investigation and shall not threaten or intimidate the witnesses.

¶12

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

¶13

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.

¶14

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

Jhuma Mudi @ Jhuni Mudi v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jhuma Mudi @ Jhuni Mudi v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Loton Hazra @ Lotan Hajra and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal

Atiur Rahaman @ Atiur Sk Vs State of West Bengal

Binoy Mandal Vs State of West Bengal

Rakib Sarkar Vs State of West Bengal

Obaidul Sk @ Obaidur @ Abaidul Sk Vs State of West Bengal

Bhabesh Chandra Mondal and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal