Yyyyy Vs State of West Bengal and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Calcutta HC (2026)

Yyyyy Vs State of West Bengal and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Calcutta HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of petitioner YYY on bail upon furnishing bond of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties of Rs.10,000/- each (one of whom must be local), to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Judge, Special Court under POCSO Act, Rampurhat, Birbhum; petitioner to remain physically present on each date fixed by the Special Court and not to leave the jurisdiction of Birbhum district without prior intimation.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, an accused in SPL (POCSO) 32/2025 (GR No. 1628 of 2025, Margram PS Case No. 181 of 2025) charged under Sections 85/80/103(1)/238/3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 4(2)/17 of the POCSO Act, should be released on bail under Section 439 CrPC / Section 483 BNSS.

Court's answer

Although a case is made out against the petitioner, further custodial detention is unwarranted; the court took into account complaints of quarrel after marriage and that the issues relating to Sections 4 and 17 of the POCSO Act arose because the girl was under age.

Ratio / Principle

Bail is subject to conditions: the petitioner shall be physically present on each and every date fixed by the learned Special Court and shall not leave the jurisdiction of the district of Birbhum without prior intimation to the learned Special Court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — Calcutta High Court (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.), order dated 09.02.2026 in CRM (M) 2396 of 2025: application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 / Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 by accused YYY in SPL (POCSO) 32/2025 corresponding to GR No. 1628 of 2025, arising out of Margram PS Case No. 181 of 2025 dated 04.07.2025 under Sections 85/80/103(1)/238/3(5) of the BNS, 2023 with Sections 4(2)/17 of the POCSO Act added. Petitioner in custody since July, 2025; incident occurred about two and half years after marriage; post mortem report showed injuries absent except the ligature mark; State opposed bail. The Court held that although a case is made out, further custodial detention of the petitioner was unwarranted, considering complaints of quarrel after marriage and that the POCSO Act Sections 4 and 17 issues arose because the girl was under age. Bail allowed on bond of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties of Rs.10,000/- each (one local) to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Judge, Special Court under POCSO Act, Rampurhat, Birbhum, with conditions of physical presence on every date fixed by the Special Court and no departure from Birbhum district without prior intimation.

09.02.2026

Serial no. 184 [G.S.D]

CRM (M) 2396 of 2025

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 SPL (POCSO) 32/2025 corresponding to GR No. 1628 of 2025 arising out of Margram PS Case No. 181 of 2025 dated 04.07.2025 u/s 85/80/103(1)/238/3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and adding Sections 4(2)/17 of the POCSO Act.

-And-

In the matter of : YYY

Mr. Angshuman Chakraborty Mr. S. S. Saha Mr. Arindam Sen Md. Kutubuddin

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

Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since July, 2025 and the incident happened after about two and half years of marriage.

Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and draws the attention of the court to the post mortem report wherein injuries were absent except for the purposes of ligature mark.

Having considered the facts of the case that there are complaints of quarrel after marriage and the issues relating to Section 4 and Section 17 of the POCSO Act were because of the girl being under age, I am of the view that although a case is made out, but, further custodial detention of the present petitioner is unwarranted.

2

Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is

Allowed.

Accordingly, the petitioner viz, YYY shall be released on bail upon furnishing bond of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Judge, Special Court under POCSO Act, Rampurhat, Birbhum.

If on bail, the petitioner shall be physically present on each and every date so fixed by the learned Special Court and shall not leave the jurisdiction of the district of Birbhum without prior intimation to the learned Special Court.

Accordingly, CRM(M) 2396 of 2025 is allowed .

Pending application(s), if any, is also disposed of.

Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

3