SOUMEN PRAMANICK ASRAF MANDAL vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL — CRM(M)/1335/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 12th June 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA0239852026
Filing Number
CRM(M)/1345/2026
Filing Date
26-May-2026
Registration No
CRM(M)/1335/2026
Registration Date
26-May-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
12-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 13-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SOUMEN PRAMANICK ASRAF MANDAL
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF WEST BENGAL
-
2.X X X X X
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
12-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Justice Tirthankar GhoshView PDF
Case Summary: The Calcutta High Court rejected Soumen Pramanick's bail application in a sexual assault case involving a 14-year-old victim. The petitioner claimed false implication and that both parties consumed alcohol, but the court found the victim's statement and medical report credible, noting charges were already framed and witness testimony was about to commence. The court permitted the petitioner to reapply for bail after vulnerable witnesses complete their evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
12-Jun-2026
New Bail Application
Hon'ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh
-
11-Jun-2026
New Bail Application
Hon'ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)
-
05-Jun-2026
Application For Bail
Hon'ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)
-
03-Jun-2026
Application For Bail
Hon'ble Justice Apurba Sinha Ray
-
29-May-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
26-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CRM(M)/1335/2026
Case Summary: The Calcutta High Court rejected Soumen Pramanick's bail application in a sexual assault case involving a 14-year-old victim. The petitioner claimed false implication and that both parties consumed alcohol, but the court found the victim's statement and medical report credible, noting charges were already framed and witness testimony was about to commence. The court permitted the petitioner to reapply for bail after vulnerable witnesses complete their evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts