High Court at Calcutta rejected bail application for Dilip Roy accused under NDPS Act. Court held petitioner failed to overcome restrictions under Section 37 due to commercial quantity seizure, despite arguments regarding quantity and medical fitness.
Prayer for bail to the petitioner is rejected; application dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
09.02.2022
Sl. 01 Court No.29 suvayan (Rejected)
HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI
C.R.M. (NDPS) 36 of 2022 (Via Video Conference)
In Re: - An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 04.02.2022 in connection with Bhaktinagar Police Station Case No. 558 of 2021 dated 27/05/2021 under Section 21(c)/22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
And
In the matter of: Dilip Roy @ Budaru Roy
….petitioner. Mr. Ranadeb Sengupta Ms. Madhusree Dutta …for the petitioner. Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty Mr. Biswarup Roy
…for the petitioner.
…for the State.
Petitioner seeks bail.
Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that considering the period of detention of the petitioner and considering the fact that the quantity is in excess of only 4 grams was seized so as to bring it within the purview of commercial quantity and taking into consideration the weight of the packing material, the narcotic is less than the commercial quantity and, therefore, under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 are not attracted.
Learned Advocate appearing for the State relies upon the case diary and submits the commercial quantity was seized from the possessing of the petitioner.
It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is suffering from cardiac problems.
The Superintendent of the Correctional Home where the petitioner is lodged, is requested to ensure that adequate medical assistance rendered to the petitioner as and when require.
Considering the fact that commercial quantity of narcotic was recovered from the possession of the petitioner, we are of the view that the petitioner is unable to overcome the restrictions under Section 37 of the
2
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Consequently, we are unable to grant bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.
C.R.M. (NDPS) 36 of 2022 is dismissed.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)
(Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)
3
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail considering the recovery of shopping commodity versus commercial quantity in light of Section 37 restrictions.
Whether the petitioner's cardiac ailments constitute valid grounds to grant bail under Section 439 CrPC.
Whether the restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are applicable given the weight of seized narcotics and packing material.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Dilip Roy @ Budaru Roy
the State
Debangsu Basak
Bibhas Ranjan De
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
