Bail application rejected. Court held petitioner does not stand on same footing as co-accused who secured bail due to telephonic conversations and money trail. Bail previously denied. Petitioner has criminal antecedents.
Bail prayer further rejected; no bail granted.
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.
18.08.2023 2 sdas rejected
C.R.M.(NDPS) No. 1395 of 2023
In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Balurghat Police Station Case No. 294 of 2022 dated 27.04.2022 under Sections 21(c )/22(c )/23(c )/25/27A/28/29 of the NDPS Act.
And
In Re : Pintu Dey Sarkar …. petitioner
Mr. Sekhar Kumar Basu, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kaushik Choudhury Mr. Gour Hari Das ….for the petitioner
Mr. Sanjoy Bardhan Ms. Baishakhi Chatterjee …… for the State
2
between the parties in trafficking narcotics. Apart from CDRs showing communication between the said Jhantulal Chakraborty and co-accused no corroborating evidence had been collected during investigation. Hence, it cannot be said that the petitioner stands on the same footing with the said coaccused. His bail prayer was rejected earlier. He has criminal antecedents. Accordingly, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
(Gaurang Kanth, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner who is in narco-related charges and has criminal antecedents.
Whether the petitioner stands on the same footing as another co-accused who was enlarged on bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Pintu Dey Sarkar
State
Gaurang Kanth
Joymalya Bagchi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
