Allowed

Monotosh Biswas @ Bura v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC20 Jul 2023CRM (NDPS)/1283/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the petitioner accused of narcotics offences. The Court found no narcotics recovered from the petitioner and noted the State's case relied on inferential statements. Bail was allowed subject to strict conditions including police meet-ins and witness protection.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with bond of Rs.10,000/- and two sureties of like amount, subject to strict conditions regarding residence and reporting.

Monotosh Biswas @ Bura Vs State of West Bengal — Narcotics (NDPS) | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

20.07.2023 6 sdas allowed

¶2

CRM(NDPS) No. 1283 of 2023

¶3

In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Hogalberia Police Station Case No. 302 of 2022 dated 27.09.2022 under Sections 20(c )/29 of the NDPS Act.

¶4

And

¶5

In Re : Monotosh Biswas @ Bura ...… petitioner

¶6

Mr. Asraf Mandal Mr. Manas Das Mr. Tushar Sil .…for the petitioner

¶7

Mr. Madhusudan Sur, learned APP Mr. Dipankar Paramanick …. for the State

¶8

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits he is in custody for 106 days. It is also contended no narcotics was recovered from his possession. Investigation is complete. He prays for bail.

¶9

Learned Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits petitioner has criminal antecedents. Statements of the villagers show petitioner is dealing narcotics.

¶10

We have considered the materials on record. No narcotics was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Statements of villagers disclose recovery of narcotics from co-accused. Their statements are inferential with regard to the involvement of the petitioner in the transaction in question. In view of scanty material on record which was the foundation of arrest and as investigating agency has not been able to produce additional convincing materials to corroborate suspicion we are of the opinion petitioner has been able to make out a prima facie case to

¶11

¶12

rebut the statutory restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act and may be enlarged on bail, however, subject to strict conditions.

¶13

Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Judge, Special Court under NDPS Act, Krishnagar, Nadia, on further condition that while on bail petitioner shall remain within the jurisdiction of Hogalberia Police Station except for the purposes of investigation and /or attending court proceeding and also intimidate the address where he reside to the investigating officer and court below and also shall meet the Officer-in-Charge, Hogalberia Police Station, once in a week until further orders. Petitioner shall appear before the trial court on every date of hearing until further orders and shall not intimidate the witnesses and/or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

In the event the petitioner fails to appear before the trial court without justifiable cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court.

¶15

The application for bail is, accordingly, allowed.

¶16

(Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

Monotosh Biswas @ Bura v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monotosh Biswas @ Bura 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

Pradip Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal

Debesh Chandra Pradhan Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Ashutosh Naskar Vs State & Ors.

The State of W B Vs Annish Mullick @ Anish Mallick

Sanchita Mondal Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Madhuri Shaw Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.