SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Tri) 73

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
ARINDAM LODH, J.
 
Smt. Gouri Debnath (Podder), W/o. Sri Saikat Podder and Anr. – Applicants
Versus
The State of Tripura – Respondent
AB 17 of 2025 
Decided On : 10-03-2025
 
Advocates Appeared :
For the Applicants : Mr. S. Lodh, Advocate, Mr. S. Majumder, Advocate 
For the Respondent : Mr. Rajib Saha, Addl. P.P. 

Advocates:
Mr. S. Lodh, Advocate; Mr. S. Majumder, Advocate; Mr. Rajib Saha, Addl. P.P.

Anticipatory bail should be granted cautiously, especially when a warrant of arrest is issued, and the absence of evidence supporting forcible abduction can justify its approval.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 96, 49, and 65(1) - POCSO Act - Section 4(1) - Application for anticipatory bail by accused-applicants apprehending arrest in connection with a kidnapping case involving a minor. (Paras 1, 2, 3, 10, 18)

(B) Anticipatory Bail - The court emphasized that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy and should be granted cautiously, especially when a warrant of arrest is issued against the accused. (Paras 7, 15)

(C) The court found that the victim did not raise any alarm during her alleged abduction, raising doubts about the claims of forcible kidnapping. (Paras 11, 16)

Facts of the case:
The accused-applicants were apprehensive of arrest related to a kidnapping case where the victim, a minor, was allegedly taken by the principal accused, with claims of abduction being questioned due to the victim's behavior.

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that the accused-applicants should be granted anticipatory bail, as there were reasonable grounds to believe they would not misuse their liberty.

Issues: The main issues included the nature of the alleged abduction and the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail given the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the absence of alarm raised by the victim during her alleged abduction and the lack of evidence against the accused-applicants warranted the granting of anticipatory bail.

Result: Anticipatory bail application allowed.

JUDGMENT :

ARINDAM LODH, J.

This is an application filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for granting anticipatory bail to the accused-applicants, namely Smt. Gouri Debnath(Podder) and Smt. Dipu Debnath since they are under serious apprehension that they will be arrested in connection with Ranirbazaar Police Station crime No.2024 RNB 028, registered under Sections 96 and 49 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and added Section 65(1) of BNS , 2023 and Section 4(1) of the POCSO Act.

2. The prosecution case as emanated from the F.I.R., briefly stated, is that on 10.11.2024 at about 1600 hours the complainant namely Krishna Chakraborty dropped his minor daughter, the victim (name withheld) at Ranirbazar near cattle market in order to go to her private tutor's house. After about 10/15 minutes of his return to his house, the private tutor of the victim had informed the complainant that his daughter (victim) did not come to his house for private tuition. On being so informed, the complainant looked for his daughter (victim) and later on, he came to know that Sri Gopal Debnath had forcefully kidnapped his minor daughter (victim) for illegal purpose and/or committing illicit act and parents of said Sri Gopal Debnath, namely, Sri Goutam Debnath and Smt. Titu Debnath (co-accused persons) had abetted said Sri Gopal Debnath to perpetrate the alleged crime.

On the aforesaid factual background of facts, the complainant, Sri Krishna Chakraborty on 12.11.2024 had lodged an F.I.R. with the O/C, Ranirbazar P.S. which was, accordingly, registered as Ranirbazar P.S. Case No.2024 RNB 028, dated 12.11.2024, under Sections 96/49 of the BNS .

Later on, the victim daughter of the complainant was recovered from the uncle's house of the principal accused, namely, Sri Gopal Debnath. After her recovery, she was produced before the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class where she made statements under Section 164(5) of Cr.P.C.

3. I have gone through the said confessional statements where she stated that for the last one year there was love affair betweer her and the principal accused person, Sri Gopal Debnath. It is further revealed from her statements that she was taken to various places and various types of transportations were used. However, it is apparent on the face of the record that she never tried to draw the attention of any of the commuters that she was abducted/kidnapped without her consent. She never raised any alarm during her entire journey to various places she mentioned in her 164(5) statements. It is also transpired that the girl was recovered with the active assistance of the father of the principal accused, Sri Gopal Debnath. It is true that she is a minor girl. The Investigating Officer arrested the principal accused, Sri Gopal Debnath, who was in custody for a considerable period of time and later on released on bail by the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO) vide interim order dated 07.12.2024 which was extended time to time and at present the extension period of the interim bail is going on. In the meantime, the Investigating Officer has also submitted charge-sheet against the principal accused with whom the girl eloped, but no charge-sheet has been filed against the present accused-applicants on the pretext that the applicants were not found available in their respective houses during the raids. As such, a prayer has been made by the Investigating Officer that investigation is going on against Smt. Gouri Debnath (Podder) and Smt. Dipu Debnath, the present accused-applicants and the supplementary charge- sheets will be filed against them after their arrest or following the due procedure of law.

4. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I have heard Mr. S. Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the accused-applicants. I have also heard Mr. Rajib Saha, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the respondent-State.

5. Mr. Saha, learned Addl. P.P. has produced the case diary. A copy of the charge-sheet has also been enclosed with

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top