Bipad Mandal @ Bipad Mondal And ANR. v. State Of West Bengal

10.7.2025 akb Sl. 16 Ct.29 Rejected CRM (NDPS) No. 710 of 2025 In re: An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with the N.D.P.S. Case No. 35 of 2024 arising out of Hogalberia Police Station Case No. 46 of 2024 dated 15.3.2024 under Section 21(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

And In re: Bipad Mandal @ Bipad Mondal & Anr.

... petitioners.

Mr. Tapodip Gupta ...for the petitioners Mr. Bitashok Banerjee Mr. Sobhan Gani ...for the State Prosecution case is that 749 bottles of phensedyl syrup containing codeine phosphate was recovered from the four accused persons including the present petitioner. Petitioner submits that he is in custody for about one year three months. His further case is that some of the prosecution witnesses who were alleged members of raiding team could identify the petitioners on the dock and some of them could not identify. He further submits that prosecution still proposes to examine four more witnesses and nobody knows when the trial could be concluded and as such he may be released on bail on any terms and conditions.

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposed the bail prayer contending that trial is in progress and 11th August and 12th August, 2025 are fixed for examination of charge sheeted witness Nos. 14 and 15 and it is expected that trial would be concluded within a short period of time and at this stage if the petitioner is released on bail there is serious chance of abscondence which may get the trial delayed further.

Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners and the State and on perusal of the materials available

with the case record and also in view of the fact that rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act attracts in the present case in respect of the present petitioners, I find that they are not entitled to be released on bail and as such the prayer for bail is considered and rejected. However, the Trial Court is requested to expedite the trial and to make every endeavour to conclude the entire proceeding preferably within a period of nine months. If the petitioners find no substantial progress during the said period and that cause of delay in trial is not attributable to the accused persons, they will be at liberty to renew their bail prayer.

The application, being CRM (NDPS) 710 of 2025 is accordingly disposed of.

(Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)