Calcutta High CourtCRM (NDPS)/1503/2025rejected

Basudeb Ghosh v. State Of West Bengal

2025-11-25Hon'Ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh2 pages

25.11.2025 Court No.35.

D/L. 21.

Rakib (Rejected) CRM (NDPS) 1503 of 2025 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, in connection with Gangarampur Police Station Case No. 532 of 2024 dated 05.10.2024 under Sections 21(c)/22(c)/23(c)/25/27A/28/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. And In the matter of : Basudeb Ghosh ......Petitioner.

Mr. Sabir Ahmed Mr. Pawan Kr. Gupta Mr. Shiladitya Barma Ms. Priyanka Ghosh ......for the Petitioner.

Mr. Abhishek Sinha Mr. Sobhan Gani ......for the State.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent of charges and when the application for anticipatory bail was rejected and challenged before the Hon'ble Apex Court, not to arrest the petitioner was granted in an application against the order passed by the High Court. The petitioner was shown arrested by the police authorities in connection with another case. Consequently, the petitioner was compelled to not press the application before the Hon'ble Apex Court and he has been shown arrested in connection with the instant case and is in custody for two months.

Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and produced the Case Diary. According to the learned

advocate there are money trail which reflects complicity of the present petitioner, there are statements under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C.

Having considered the period of detention of the petitioner and the fact that charge has not been framed in connection with the instant case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail at this stage.

Petitioner would renew his prayer for bail after the stage of consideration of charges is over.

Accordingly, CRM (NDPS) 1503 of 2025 is dismissed at this stage.

The learned trial Court is directed to exhaust harsher process of law in respect of the absconding accused person and if required split up the trial of the case.

Case Diary be returned to the learned advocate appearing for the State.

All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)