Jhantulal Chakraborty @ Bitla v. State Of West Bengal

22.06.2022 Serial no. 18 [Dd] (Anticipatory bail Rejected) CRM (A) 2869 of 2022 In re : An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Malda Police Station Case No. 556 of 2021 dated 12.11.2021 under Sections 20(c)/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act read with Sections 18(b)/27 of Drugs and Cosmetics Act (corresponding to Special Case No. 125 of 2021) -AndIn the matter of : Jhantulal Chakraborty @ Bitla ... ...Petitioner Mr. Kaushik Chowdhury, Ms. Busra Khatun, Advocates ... ... For the Petitioner Mr. Ranadeb Sengupta, Advocate ... ...For the State Petitioner prays for anticipatory bail.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that no narcotic was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The police filed charge sheet and, therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. There is no material implicating the petitioner with the alleged offences. The petitioner was falsely implicated.

Learned advocate appearing for the State draws the attention of the Court to the order dated February 23, 2022 passed CRM 8427 of 2021. He submits that in the said application for anticipatory bail in respect of Shibu Sarkar @ Halder, a report was called for. Report dated February 17, 2022 was considered. He refers to the same report in this matter also. He submits that the present

petitioner is one of the partners of the business along with of Shibu Sarkar @ Halder. He submits that the partners are using mobile phone registered in the name of different persons in order to avoid detection, if possible. By the order dated February 23, 2022 passed in CRM 8427 of 2021, prayer for anticipatory bail of the coaccused was turned down after considering report dated February 17, 2022.

The report dated February 17, 2022 states that the petitioner is one of the partners in the business along with Shibu Sarkar @ Halder. The petitioner, therefore, stands on the same footing as that of Shibu Sarkar @ Halder at least on the basis of the report dated February 17, 2022. In such circumstances, we are of the view that the petitioner is unable to overcome the restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

In view of the reasoning recorded in the order dated February 23, 2022 and also otherwise, we are not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

CRM (A) 2869 of 2022 is dismissed.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)