Raju Pramanik And ANR. v. State Of West Bengal

02.04.2026 Sl. No.88 NB CRM (A) 720 of 2026 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Murutia PS Case No.208/2025 dated 2nd August, 2025 under Sections 21(c)/25/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

And In the matter of: Raju Praamanik & Anr.

... petitioners Mr. Sumanta Das, Mr. Asraf Mandal.

...for the petitioners.

Mr. Soumick Ganguly, Mr. Pratick Bose.

..for the State.

Report filed on behalf of the State is taken on record. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that other than the statement of a co-accused, there is no other incriminating material available against the present petitioners. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the case diary and the report, which is taken on record. As per the report, there are phone call conversations between the petitioners and the arrested accused before and at the relevant time, and the persons were found to be in close proximity as per the tower location data at the relevant time.

Considering the above, the other incriminating materials available in the case diary and the restriction contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the present petitioners. The application for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is, thus, rejected.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order may be delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all formalities.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)