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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner Pritam Barui enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties of Rs.10,000 each (one local surety), to the satisfaction of the learned Judge, Special Court under POCSO Act, Berhampore, Murshidabad; subject to conditions that he remain physically present on every date fixed by the trial court and not leave the district of Murshidabad without prior intimation to the trial court. Pending application(s), if any, disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, claiming to be similarly placed (parity) with other accused persons already granted bail in CRM(M) 2406 of 2025 and CRM(M) 525 of 2026, should be enlarged on bail in connection with Berhampore Police Station Case No. 1680 of 2025.

Court's answer

Accepting the parity contention — which the State, while opposing bail, was unable to refute — the court was inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Ratio / Principle

The prayer for bail was allowed: the petitioner was to be released on bail on furnishing a 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 Judge, Special Court under POCSO Act, Berhampore, Murshidabad.

Key takeaways

Bail was made subject to conduct conditions: the petitioner must be physically available on each and every date fixed by the learned trial court and must not leave the district of Murshidabad without prior intimation to the learned trial court.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — parity with co-accused — Calcutta High Court (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.) allowed the bail prayer of Pritam Barui, an accused in Berhampore Police Station Case No. 1680 of 2025 dated 27.07.2025 under Sections 143(4)/144(1)/61(2)/70(1) of the BNS, 2023 read with Sections 3/4/5/6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, the application having been moved under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 / Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023. Counsel urged that the petitioner was similarly placed as other accused persons already granted bail in CRM(M) 2406 of 2025 and CRM(M) 525 of 2026; the State opposed bail but could not refute the parity contention. Bail granted on bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties of Rs.10,000 each (one local), to the satisfaction of the learned Judge, Special Court under POCSO Act, Berhampore, Murshidabad, with conditions of physical availability on every trial date and no departure from Murshidabad district without prior intimation to the trial court.

01.04.2026

Serial no. 127 [G.S.D]

CRM (M) 664 of 2026

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 Berhampore Police Station Case No. 1680 of 2025 dated 27.07.2025 u/s 143(4)/144(1)/61(2)/70(1) of the BNS, 2023 read with 3/4/5/6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

-And-

In the matter of : Pritam Barui

… Petitioner(s)

Mr. Ankan Das Mr. Raunak Seal Ms. Sulekha Biswas Mr. Abdul Ishaque Malitha Ms. S. Ghosh Ms. Kriti Saha … for the Petitioner(s) Ms. Subhasree Patel Mr. Ratul Ghosh … for the State-respondent(s)

Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is similarly placed as the other accused persons who have been granted bail in CRM(M) 2406 of 2025 and CRM(M) 525 of 2026.

Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail but is unable to refute the contentions so far as the issue relating to parity is concerned.

Having considered the same, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

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

2

Accordingly, the petitioner viz, Pritam Barui 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 Judge, Special Court, under POCSO Act, Berhampore, Murshidabad.

If on bail, the petitioner shall also make himself physically available on each and every date so fixed by the learned trial court and shall not leave the district of Murshidabad without prior intimation to the learned trial court.

Accordingly, CRM(M) 664 of 2026 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