Indubhushan Halder @ Dulal Halder v. Enforcement Directorate

04.09.2025 Court No.28 Item No.41 tbsr Reject CRM (A) 1856 of 2025 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with ECIR No. KLZO-II/6/2025 dated 17.04.2025 under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. And In the matter of: Indubhushan Halder @ Dulal Halder ....Petitioner.

Mr. Satadru Lahiri Mr. Abhijit Mondal ...for the petitioner Mr. Phiroze Edulji, Sr. Advl Ms. Anamika Pandey Ms. S. Chaudhury ....for the E.D.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The allegation against the present petitioner is that he used to facilitate obtaining of fresh passport and renewal of passport by Bangladeshi nationals by use of forged documents. The only material available against the petitioner is that the statement of a co-accused, which is not admissible in evidence.

Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Enforcement Directorate strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits apart from the statements of the co-accused, there are call records showing that the petitioner made at least 557 calls to the prime accused in this case who is a Pakistani national and who is in custody. The total duration of the calls is about 11 hours and 39 minutes. In league with this Pakistani national, the petitioner facilitated obtaining of passport and renewal of the same by Bangladeshi nationals by use of forged documents.

Considering the incriminating materials available in the case diary and the phone call records showing frequent calls between the petitioner and the prime accused, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Jay Sengupta, J.)