Subhranil Talukdar v. State Of West Bengal

03.02.2026 Item no. 190.

Court No.35.

AB (Rejected) CRM (NDPS) 192 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kaliachak P.S. Case No.1044 Dated 15.06.2025 under Sections 21(c) /25/27A/29 of the NDPS Act And In the matter of : Subhranil Talukdar ......Petitioner.

Mr. Apalak Basu, Mr. Dipta Banerjee Ms. Swarnali Gupta, Mr. Ashok Pandey Mr. S. N. Ghosh ......for the Petitioner.

Mr. Sanjay Banerjee, Ms. Jonaki Saha ......for the State.

1.

Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for more than seven months and four of the accused persons are absconding. As such, there is no possibility of the trial commencing very soon. Further, the petitioner was present at the relevant point of time. That is why he has been implicated in this case. 2.

On the other hand, learned advocate for the State has produced the case diary and has drawn the attention of this Court to the seizure list which reflects that seizure took place at 2.00 to 2.36 hours.

3.

Having considered the fact that the petitioner himself was present at the relevant point of time at the house of

the other accused persons, which substantiates and fortifies some claim at least of the allegation, at this stage, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. 4.

The petitioner will renew his prayer for bail after the evidence of seizure list witnesses are over.

5.

Since the petitioner is not similarly placed with other accused persons, who have been granted bail, learned Trial Court, if required, is directed to split up the trial by exhausting the process of law preferably within a period of 90 days from the next date fixed.

6.

Accordingly, CRM (NDPS) 192 of 2026 is dismissed. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)