Amrita Malakar v. The State

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR *** CRM(NDPS)/9/2023 Amrita Malakar Vs.

The State Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar ... for the petitioner Ms. A.S.Zinu ... for the State December 12, 2023 [SR] Item No.10 The petitioner is an accused in the case in relation to which we had considered the application for bail CRM(NDPS)/7/2023 Nadeem @ Pawan vs. The State (UT of Andaman and Nicobar Islands) and connected matters on 11th December, 2023.

Mr.Gopala Binnu Kumar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that accusation had been made against his client, he was arrested and charge framed on the basis of the statements made by a co-accused. There was no direct recovery of contraband material from his client. On the other hand, Ms.A.S.Zinu, learned advocate appearing for the State produces statements of independent witnesses who testified that contraband materials had been sold by the accused on payment into a third party's account. Hence, in our opinion, this is not a case where under section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, we can form an opinion that there are reasonable

grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence.

In this case, investigation is complete. Charge sheet has been submitted. Charges are likely to be framed soon. Therefore, we dispose of this application by directing the trial to be conducted and concluded within a period of four months from date.

We observe that within the period the petitioner is undergoing trial, he shall be at liberty to apply a fresh for bail before the learned trial judge. The Court might consider his conduct, complicity in the crime, the evidence received and other factors in re-considering his application for bail, pending trial.

( I.P.Mukerji, J.) ( Shampa Dutt (Paul), J. )