Biplab Mandal@Mahadeb Mandal Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2026)

Biplab Mandal@Mahadeb Mandal Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No anticipatory bail; the petitioner remains free to appear before the Learned Magistrate with materials substantiating a change of circumstances, upon which the regular court may consider a prayer for bail.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with Ghoksadanga PS Case No. 324 of 2023, given his contention that the provisions of the POCSO Act are not attracted and that there has been a change of circumstances due to marriage between the parties. +1 more

Court's answer

The petitioner's prayer for (anticipatory) bail stands rejected.

Ratio / Principle

The Court was not inclined to accede to the fresh prayer for anticipatory bail because the Hon'ble Division Bench had already dealt with the issues and had rejected anticipatory bail on consideration of the case diary.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner appears before the Learned Magistrate with materials substantiating that there has been a change of circumstances, the regular court will consider the prayer for bail taking into account the changed circumstances.obiter¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail - Second/repeat application - Calcutta High Court, Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.) dismissed CRM (A) 624 of 2025, an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 / Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. arising out of Ghoksadanga PS Case No. 324 of 2023 dated 30.06.2023 under sections 363/365/325 of the IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner's earlier anticipatory bail application, CRM(A) 634 of 2023, had already been rejected by a Division Bench of the same Court on consideration of the case diary. Notwithstanding the petitioner's contentions that the POCSO provisions were not attracted and that marriage between the parties amounted to a change of circumstances, the Single Judge declined to accede to the fresh prayer and rejected it, while observing that the petitioner may appear before the Learned Magistrate with materials substantiating the change of circumstances, whereupon the regular court would consider a prayer for bail in light of the changed circumstances.

05.01.2026

Serial no. 1 [G.S.D]

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI

CRM (A) 624 of 2025

In re : An Application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023/under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with Ghoksadanga PS Case No. 324 of 2023 dated 30.06.2023 under sections 363/365/325 of the IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

-And-

In the matter of : Biplab Mandal @ Mahadeb Mandal

… Petitioner(s)

Mr. Sudip Guha

… for the petitioner(s)

Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, ld. APP Mr. Tapan Bhattacharjee Mr. Sagnik Sankar Sikdar

Mr. Swapan Bhowmik

… for the State-respondent(s) … for the defacto- complainant(s)

Learned advocate for the petitioner prays for anticipatory bail on the ground that the provisions of the POCSO Act are not attracted and there has been change of circumstances as there has been marriage between the parties.

Learned advocate for the State refers to the FIR which speaks that the incident occurred ten months’ prior to the date of registration of the FIR, consequently, the victim was minor at the relevant stage.

2

The records of the case reflects that earlier the petitioner preferred an application for Anticipatory Bail being CRM(A) 634 of 2023 wherein the prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected by a Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court.

Having considered the fact that the Hon’ble Division Bench had the occasion to deal with the issues and the anticipatory bail was rejected on consideration of the case diary, I am not inclined to accede to the prayer of the petitioner.

Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is

Rejected.

However, if the petitioner appears before the Learned Magistrate with materials to substantiate that there has been change of circumstances, the regular court will consider the prayer for bail taking into account the changed circumstances.

Accordingly, CRM(A) 624 of 2025 is dismissed . 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