DEBASISH SENGUPTA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a case under Sec. 354 (B)/376(2)(f)(n)/ 385 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the present petitioner was appointed as private tutor for the victim (daughter of de facto complainant) in the year 2013 and in the month of September 2018 the petitioner taking advantage of the absence of the family members took obscene photographs of the victim and blackmailed her. Further, in December 2018, he also took obscene pictures and threatened to circulate the same and in August 2019 the petitioner molested the victim and had forceful sexual intercourse, causing pain to the private parts of the victim. On such basis the present case was initiated.

(3.) Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was appointed as a private tutor for the victim lady for the subject of anatomy art and there was consensual relationship between the petitioner and the victim lady. He further submitted that the petitioner and his family members were humiliated and threatened in relation to which the petitioner preferred a writ application before the Hon'ble Court regarding inaction of the police being WPA 8620 of 2020 and in counter- blast to the same this case has been initiated falsely. Moreover, he submitted that the anticipatory bail application of this petitioner was rejected by this Court in CRM no.11170 of 2020 which was also challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Cri) 1220 of 2021 which was also turned down and subsequent thereto the petitioner voluntarily surrendered before Learned ACJM Biddhannagar on 19/02/2021. The petitioner has time and again cooperated with the Investigating Agency and has no prior criminal antecedents. The passport of the petitioner was also seized by the Investigating Agency and therefore the possibility of his abscondence or evading the process of law is ruled out. Furthermore, charge-sheet has already being submitted after completion of investigation and the petitioner is languishing in custody for the last 208 days. In view of his above submission learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.