Allowed

Kabil Sk. and Ors. v. the State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC23 Dec 2021CRM/4951/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to aged petitioners charged under the NDPS Act for opium cultivation. The court held Section 37 did not apply due to lack of contraband quantification and deemed custodial interrogation unnecessary given the petitioners' age and low flight risk.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners allowed anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 each and conditions to remain within jurisdiction and not tamper with evidence.

Kabil Sk. and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal — Narcotics (NDPS) | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

23.12.2021 Court No.32 rpan /521

¶2

C.R.M. 4951 of 2021

¶3

In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure;

¶4

And

¶5

In re: Kabil Sk. & Others - Petitioners

¶6

Ms. Minoti Gomes, Mr. Mazahar Hossain Chowdhury … for the Petitioners. Mr. Saibal Bapuli, Mr. Soumik Ganguly

¶7

… for the State.

¶8

Apprehending arrest in connection with Baishnabnagar Police Station Case No.95 of 2016 dated 16.02.2016 under Section 18(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the petitioners have filed the present application.

¶9

Ms. Gomes, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1, the petitioner no.2 and the petitioner no.3 are aged about 53 years, 68 years and 76 years respectively and there is no likelihood that they would flee from justice.

¶10

She further submits that the prosecution alleges cultivation of poppy plants over large tracks of land and the petitioners have been roped in alleging that they are the owners of certain plots. There had been no quantification of the contraband and in the said conspectus, the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail.

¶11

¶12

Mr. Ganguly, learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the petitioners’ prayer and places reliance upon the statements of the witnesses, as recorded under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He further submits that the petitioners had been absconding for a substantial period of time. Answering a query of this Court, he, however, submits that no proclamation has been issued.

¶13

Upon hearing the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considering the materials in the case diary, we are of the opinion that the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted. The petitioners are all aged persons and prima facie , there is no likelihood that they would flee from justice or delay the trial by abscondance. Upon completion of investigation charge sheet has also been submitted. In view thereof, we are of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary.

¶14

Accordingly, we allow this application and direct that in the event of arrest the petitioners, namely, Kabil Sk. , Seikh Entaj @ Enataz Sekh and Saharu Sk. shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with a further condition that they shall not leave the jurisdiction of Kaliachak Police Station, save and except for attending the Trial Court on the dates specified for hearing.

¶15

¶16

It is further directed that the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence and/or intimidate the witnesses in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

In the event the petitioners fail to comply with the aforesaid directions, without any justifiable cause, the learned court below shall be at liberty to cancel their bail, in accordance with law, without further reference to this Court.

¶18

The application for anticipatory bail, being CRM 4951 of 2021 is, thus, disposed of.

¶19

All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶20

(Sugato Majumdar, J) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J)

Kabil Sk. and Ors. v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kabil Sk. and Ors. v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nur Hasan and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal

Sekh Addul Salam @ Sk Abdurs Salam Vs State of West Bengal

Jiaul Hoque @ Tinku and Anr. Vs the State of West Bengal

Ali Hossain @ Sk. Israil @ Sk. Ali Hossain and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal

Tushar Kumar Singh Vs State of West Bengal

Robiul Alam Alias Rabiual Alam and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal