NAREN GHOSH ARUP KUMAR BHOWMICK vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR — CRM(M) /231/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 25th March 2026.

CNR: WBCHCA0030782026

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

29th January 2026

Filing Number

CRM(M) /187/2026

Filing Date

21-01-2026

Registration No

CRM(M) /231/2026

Registration Date

22-01-2026

Judge

HON'BLE JUSTICE TIRTHANKAR GHOSH

Coram

HON'BLE JUSTICE TIRTHANKAR GHOSH

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP C (CRIMINAL MATTERS) ( 3 )

Sub-Category

Bail/Cancellation of bail ( 11 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL SECTION

Decision Date

25th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 483
Code of Criminal Procedure ,1973 Section 439
Indian Penal Code Act ,1860 Section 376AB/506
Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act Section 6

Petitioner(s)

NAREN GHOSH ARUP KUMAR BHOWMICK

Respondent(s)

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR

VICTIM GIRL

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE TIRTHANKAR GHOSH

29-01-2026

APPLICATION FOR BAIL

24-02-2026

APPLICATION FOR BAIL

12-02-2026

APPLICATION FOR BAIL

11-02-2026

APPLICATION FOR BAIL

10-02-2026

APPLICATION FOR BAIL

Orders

25-03-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE TIRTHANKAR GHOSH

The court dismissed Naren Ghosh's bail application in a POCSO Act case involving charges of rape and criminal intimidation. Despite the petitioner's 280 days in custody and completion of victim examination, the court found that vulnerable witnesses remained to be examined and considered the petitioner's history of evading law enforcement, thus refusing bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed Naren Ghosh's bail application in a POCSO Act case involving charges of rape and criminal intimidation. Despite the petitioner's 280 days in custody and completion of victim examination, the court found that vulnerable witnesses remained to be examined and considered the petitioner's history of evading law enforcement, thus refusing bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case