Dismissed¶19

Shankar Sarkar v. State of West Bengal

Anticipatory bail – NDPS Act – Sections 21(c)/22(c)/23(c)/27A

Calcutta HC1 Feb 2024CRM (A)/316/2024

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC rejected in NDPS case (Sections 21(c)/22(c)/23(c)/27A), Hili Police Station Case No. 115 of 2023 dated 29.6.2023; presumption under Section 37 NDPS Act, 1985; commercial quantity of narcotics; criminal antecedents; multiple pending police cases; C.R.M.(A) 316 of 2024 decided 01.02.2024; application dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is unable to repel the presumption under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985. ¶17

Shankar Sarkar Vs State of West Bengal — Narcotics (NDPS) | Calcutta HC (2024)

¶1

01.02.2024 19 Ct. No. 29 S.D. REJECTED

¶2

C.R.M.(A) 316 of 2024

¶3

In Re:- In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Hili Police Station Case No. 115 of 2023 dated 29.6.2023 under Section 21(c)/22(c)/23(c)/27A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act .

¶4

And

¶5

In Re : Shankar Sarkar

¶6

...… petitioner

¶7

Mr. Kaushik Chowdhury Ms. Busra Khatoon Mr. Abhishek Kabir

¶8

…for the petitioner

¶9

Mr. Dipankar Paramanick …for the State

¶10

Petitioner prays for anticipatory bail.

¶11

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, no recovery was made from the possession of the petitioner. Petitioner is being proceeded against on the basis of the statement of the co-accused. Petitioner obtained bail in one police case. There are according to him two other police cases pending against the petitioner. In aggregate, it is submitted that, there are three police cases as against the petitioner.

¶12

Learned advocate appearing for the State submits that, persons at the locality where the petitioner resides stated that the petitioner is engaged in the business of narcotics.

¶13

¶14

Moreover, there are four police cases as against the petitioner including the present one.

¶15

There are materials in the case diary including the complicity of the petitioner in the commercial quantity of narcotics seized.

¶16

There are criminal antecedents so far as the petitioner is concerned. Petitioner did not obtain bail or anticipatory bail as the case may be in all the police cases.

¶17

In such circumstances, we are of the view that the petitioner is unable to repel the presumption under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

¶18

Consequently, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

¶19

The application being CRM (A) 316 of 2024 is dismissed.

¶20

(Debangsu Basak, J.)

¶21

(Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)

Shankar Sarkar v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shankar Sarkar v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Padmalochan Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal

Abhishek Podder Vs State of West Bengal

Ajoy Sardar Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Sharban Kumar Gupta Vs State of West Bengal

Amal Middya Vs State of West Bengal

Hasikul Islam and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal