Disposed¶14

Barun Mandal and Anr. v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC20 Aug 2025CRM (NDPS)/777/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NDPS bail rejected; Section 37 NDPS Act rigor not overcome; phensedyl cough syrup codeine phosphate recovery; arms and ammunition; Arms Act offences; Kaliachak Police Station Case No. 98 of 2025; custody since 23.01.2025; absconding accused; direction to frame charge expeditiously and split case record; CRM (NDPS) 777 of 2025; Calcutta High Court; Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.; bail application disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Bail prayer of petitioner no. 1, Barun Mandal, was not pressed and was accordingly rejected. ¶8

Barun Mandal and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal — Narcotics (NDPS) | Calcutta HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner (petitioner no. 2) is entitled to bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, corresponding to Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, in the NDPS/Arms Act case. +1 more

¶5

Ratio / Principle

Bail prayer of petitioner no. 1, Barun Mandal, was not pressed and was accordingly rejected.

¶8

Key takeaways

The petitioner failed to overcome the rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act; his prayer for bail was considered and rejected.ratio¶11
The trial Court was requested to make every endeavour to frame charge at the earliest and, if required, by splitting the case record in connection with the absconding accused.obiter¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Calcutta High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous (NDPS) Jurisdiction — CRM (NDPS) 777 of 2025, decided 20.08.2025 by Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J. Bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, corresponding to Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, filed 19.6.2025, in connection with Kaliachak Police Station Case No. 98 of 2025 dated 23.01.2025 under Sections 21(C)/27A/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985, Sections 25(1B)(a)/27/35/125(6)/25(8) of the Arms Act and Section 61(2) of the BNSS, 2023. Prosecution alleged recovery of 100 bottles of phensedyl cough syrup containing codeine phosphate along with arms and ammunition from the joint possession of petitioners Barun Mandal and Mithu Sk, and a further recovery of 130 bottles of cough syrup from the house of Barun Mandal following his statement; seven accused persons absconding; petitioner in custody since 23.01.2025. Held: bail prayer of petitioner no. 1 (Barun Mandal) not pressed and hence rejected; petitioner no. 2 failed to overcome the rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and his bail prayer was considered and rejected. Trial Court requested to frame charge at the earliest, splitting the case record if required in respect of the absconding accused. Application disposed of.

¶1

20.08.2025 Court No.29 Item No.57 (Rejected)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION

¶3

CRM (NDPS) 777 of 2025

¶4

¶5

In Re:- An application for bail under Section439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed on 19.6.2025 in connection with Kaliachak Police Station Case No. 98 of 2025 dated 23.01.2025 under Sections 21(C)/27A/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Sections 25(1B)(a)/27/35/125(6)/25(8) of the Arms Act and Section 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023;

¶6

And

¶7

In the matter of : Barun Mandal and another …Petitioners. Mr. Arup Kumar Bhowmick. …For the Petitioner. Mr. Antarikhya Basu, Mr. Dipankar Pramanick. ...For the State.

¶8

Bail prayer of petitioner no. 1, Barun Mandal, is not pressed. Hence, rejected.

¶9

The prosecution case is that 100 bottles of phensedyl cough syrup containing codeine phosphate along with arms and ammunition were recovered from the joint possession of the present petitioners, namely, Barun Mandal and Mithu Sk. Thereafter following the statement of petitioner no. 1, Barun Mandal, 130 bottles of cough syrup was further recovered from the house of Barun Mandal.

¶10

Prosecution further case is that seven accused persons are still absconding and the petitioner herein is in custody since 23^rd January 2025.

¶11

Having heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the State and the materials placed before me, it appears that the petitioner has failed to overcome the rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and, as such, his prayer for bail is considered and rejected.

¶12

¶13

However, the trial Court is requested to make every endeavour to frame charge at an earliest and if required by splitting the case record in connection with the absconding accused.

¶14

Accordingly, CRM (NDPS) 777 of 2025 is disposed of.

¶15

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, duly applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.

¶16

(Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)

Barun Mandal and Anr. v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Barun Mandal and Anr. 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

Ranjan Roy Vs State of West Bengal

Rohit Sk @ Rahid Sk Vs State of West Bengal

Sahidul Islam @ Sohidul Islam Vs State of West Bengal

Rabiul Gazi @ Robiul Gaji Vs State of West Bengal

Madhab Mandal @ Madhab Mondal Vs State of West Bengal

Laxman Halder @ Laxshman Vs State of West Bengal