Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sumit Kumar Modak @ Tatai vs Unknown on 2 July, 2025
02.07.2025
SL No.26
Sg/sm
(Allowed)
C.R.M. (M) 683 of 2025
In Re: - An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973/Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. 2023 filed
on 10.06.2025 in connection with Nadanghat P.S. Case No.
197 of 2025 dated 30.03.2025 under Sections
64(2)(a)(m)/75(2)/78(2)/351(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023.
And
In the matter of: Sumit Kumar Modak @ Tatai
....Petitioner
Mr. Dhananjay Banerjee,
Mr. Pralay Hazra,
...for the petitioner
Mr. Arindam Sen,
Mr. Mujibar Ali Naskar
...for the State
1.
The petitioner is stated to be in custody since 31st March,
2025. The petitioner is around 36 years of married person. The
complainant/victim was the private tutor, allegedly she met the
petitioner three years ago. Upon being threatened the
prosecutrix established physical relation with him in a hotel.
During this, the petitioner took certain photographs and started
blackmailing her. Allegedly, the petitioner also circulated such
photographs of the victim to the person whom she was about to
marry.
2. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail
application on the ground that the physical relations were
established under threat. It has further been submitted that the
petitioner took certain photographs of the victim under
deception and later on circulated the same.
3. The petitioner stated to be in custody since 31st March,
2025 vide FIR dated 30th March, 2025 is only under Sections
2
64(2)(a)(m)/75(2)/78(2)/351(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023. There is no
mention of IT Act in the FIR.
4. The plea of the learned counsel for the State is that since
forensic report has not been received appropriate sections of IT
Act have not been attracted.
5. Learned counsel for the State has also submitted that the
State shall file a supplementary charge-sheet.
6. The court has considered the submissions. The petitioner
and the victim were having relation for last three years. Both
are major. The charge-sheet has already been filed. The
question whether the relations were established under the threat
or consensual is a matter of trial.
7. Taking into account, facts and circumstances, the
petitioner is admitted to bail on furnishing personal bond of
Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount, one of whom must
be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Kalna, Purba Bardhaman. Subject to the
further condition that petitioner shall not intimidate or threaten
the prosecutrix in any manner and shall also not contact her.
The petitioner shall also not visit the locality in which the victim
is residing.
8. The application for bail is, thus, allowed.
9. All parties shall act on the basis of the server copy of this
order.
(Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.)