Dismissed

Jiarul Sardar and Anr. v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC8 Mar 2021CRM/733/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the bail application filed under Section 439 CrPC in a narcotics case involving 10 litres of codeine mixture. Due to the commercial quantity of contraband seized, the court deemed bail inappropriate and directed the trial court to conclude the trial without delays.

What did the court decide?

Application for bail rejected; trial directed to be concluded regularly.

Jiarul Sardar and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal — Narcotics (NDPS) | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

08.03.2021 Court No.28 Item No. 33 Krishnendu Bail Rejected

¶2

CRM 733 of 2021 (Via video Conference)

¶3

In Re:- An application for bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ;

¶4

And In Re : Jiarul Sardar & Anr.

¶5

……Petitioners Ms. Devipriya Mitra Mr. Prabir Kumar Banerjee ….For the Petitioners Mr. Binay Panda Mrs. Puspita Saha …….For the State

¶6

The present application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioners in connection with Basirhat Police Station Case No.409 of 2020 dated 26.03.2020 under sections 21C/29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Case No. N-107 of 2020).

¶7

The learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in custody since 26th March, 2020 and although charge sheet has been submitted but till date there has been no progress in the trial. Additionally, he submits that on any condition the petitioners may be released on bail.

¶8

The learned advocate for the State submits that the chemical examiner’s report has already been submitted and as the subject matter of the case involves seizure of 10 litres of codeine mixture and that too from the possession of the present petitioners, the provisions of section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act are attracted.

¶9

¶10

We have taken into account the subject matter of the case involving commercial quantity of contraband being seized and as

¶11

such we are not inclined to release the petitioners on bail. Hence, their prayer for bail is rejected.

¶12

Having regard to the fact that the prosecution has relied upon seven witnesses to prove its case and the petitioners are in custody , the learned Trial Court should take all steps so that the trial of the case is conducted regularly and the same is concluded within a reasonable period of time without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶13

With the aforesaid observations, the application for bail, being CRM 733 of 2021, is disposed of.

¶14

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J)

Jiarul Sardar and Anr. v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jiarul Sardar and Anr. v. 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

Dinesh Gupta Vs State of West Bengal

Satarupa Rakshit Vs State of West Bengal

Kingsuk @ Kingshuk Rakshit Vs State of West Bengal

Sudip Samanta Vs State of West Bengal

Bidhan Nath and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal

Pranab Ghosh @Babu Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal