Dismissed

Dibakar Mandal @ Paltu v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC22 Sept 2026CRM (A)/3008/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed by Dibakar Mandal @ Paltu in connection with a Kaliachak Police Station case involving alleged recovery of 455 grams of brown sugar and 7 country-made pipe guns under the NDPS Act and Arms Act. The petitioner was FIR-named and had another pending NDPS case. The court declined bail considering the seriousness of allegations and the petitioner's involvement in multiple cases.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application dismissed.

Dibakar Mandal @ Paltu Vs State of West Bengal — Narcotics (NDPS) | Calcutta HC (2026)

¶1

22.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L.19. Rakib (Rejected)

¶2

CRM (A) 3008 of 2026

¶3

In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kaliachak Police Station case no. 741 of 2026 dated 02.06.2026 under Sections and under Sections 21(C)/25/27A/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 and under Section 25(1-B) of the Arms Act.

¶4

And

¶5

In the matter of : Dibakar Mandal @ Paltu

¶6

Mr. Arnab Chatterjee Mr. Avik Ghosh Ms. Ankusha Ghosh Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta Mr. Sreyash Kumar Singh

¶7

……Petitioner. .....for the Petitioner. ……for the State.

¶8

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in connection with the instant case. There are no materials against the present petitioner and has been implicated on the basis of statement of coaccused. It has also been contended that petitioner has no relations with the other accused persons who were intercepted at the spot and unnecessarily he has been foisted with the criminal case by the police authorities.

¶9

Learned advocate appearing for the State on the other hand opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that in the present case there has been alleged recovery of 455 grams of brown sugar along with 7 country-made pipe gun. Petitioner is FIR named and there is another criminal case under the NDPS Act against the present petitioner.

¶10

¶11

I have taken into account the facts of the case as also the other materials appearing. Considering that petitioner is wanted in more than one case, I am not inclined to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail to the present petitioner.

¶12

Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner in CRM (A) 3008 of 2026 is dismissed.

¶13

Memo of evidence submitted by the State be kept with the record.

¶14

All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶15

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

¶16

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

Dibakar Mandal @ Paltu v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dibakar Mandal @ Paltu 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