Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Bijay Sarkar Vs the State of West Bengal — Narcotics (NDPS) | Calcutta HC (2026)

Home
Calcutta HC
2026
Bijay Sarkar Vs the State of West BengalBijay Sarkar v. the State of West Bengal

Dismissed¶¶12

Bijay Sarkar v. the State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC12 Jun 2026CRM(A)/330/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bijay Sarkar | CRM(A) 330 of 2026 | Calcutta High Court, Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri | decided 12.06.2026 | anticipatory bail rejected | S. 438 CrPC / corresponding S. 482 BNSS 2023 | NDPS Act Ss. 20(b)(ii)(c)/29 | Phansidewa Police Station Case No. 480 of 2025 dated 08.11.2025 | implication only on co-accused's statement | petitioner's vehicle used for transportation of narcotics | S. 161 CrPC statements | case diary considered | not a fit case | Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.

What did the court decide?

Considering the materials in the case diary, this is not a fit case for anticipatory bail. ¶¶11

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, alleged to have been implicated only on the statement of a co-accused, is entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with Phansidewa Police Station Case No. 480 of 2025 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

Court's answer

Considering the materials in the case diary, this is not a fit case for anticipatory bail.

Ratio / Principle

The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail refused – NDPS: Application under S. 438 CrPC read with corresponding S. 482 BNSS, 2023 in Phansidewa Police Station Case No. 480 of 2025 dated 08.11.2025 under Ss. 20(b)(ii)(c)/29, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Petitioner contended he was implicated solely on the statement of a co-accused; the State submitted that, apart from the co-accused's statement, the petitioner's vehicle was used to transport the narcotics and S. 161 CrPC statements indicated the contraband was moved at the petitioner's direction. Considering the case diary, the Court held this was not a fit case for anticipatory bail, rejected the prayer and disposed of CRM(A) 330 of 2026.

A

12.06.2026 Court No.5 SL No.12 g.b.

HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI

CRM(A) 330 of 2026

In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and corresponding Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Phansidewa Police Station Case No. 480 of 2025 dated 08.11.2025 under Sections 20 (b) (ii) (c )/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

And

In the matter of: Bijay Sarkar ….Petitioner. Mr. Hillol Saha Podder …For the Petitioner. Mr. Avrojyoti Das, Ld. APP Ms. Panchali Deb Sikdar …For the State.

The petitioner herein prays for anticipatory bail in connection with Phansidewa Police Station Case No. 480 of 2025 dated 08.11.2025 under Sections 20 (b) (ii) (c )/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. On hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State who has placed the case diary, it appears that the contention of the petitioner is that he has been implicated in the present case only on the basis of the statement of a co-accused.

2

Learned counsel for the State submits that other than the statement of a co-accused, it is on record that the petitioner’s vehicle was being used for transportation of the said narcotics and it appears from the statement recorded under Section 161 of the Cr. P. C., that the contraband articles were being transported allegedly on the directions of

the present petitioner.

Considering the said materials in the case diary, this is not a fit case for anticipatory bail.

Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

CRM (A) 330 of 2026 is, thus, disposed of.

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

(Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.)

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the petitioner, alleged to have been implicated only on the statement of a co-accused, is entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with Phansidewa Police Station Case No. 480 of 2025 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.¶¶7
The court held
Considering the materials in the case diary, this is not a fit case for anticipatory bail.ratio¶¶11

Statutes considered

4 provisions across 3 enactments

AI extract

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973438¶¶4 161¶¶9
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023482¶¶4
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 198520(b)(ii)(c)/29¶¶4

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Phansidewa Police Station Case No. 480 of 2025 dated 08.11.2025 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c)/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985; the learned counsel for the State placed the case diary before the Court.¶¶7

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Bijay Sarkar¶¶6
Hillol Saha Podder
respondent
The State¶¶6
Avrojyoti Das, Panchali Deb Sikdar

Coram

AI extract

Shampa Dutt (Paul)author¶¶15

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Calcutta HC
Decided on: 12 Jun 2026 · June
Registered: 10 Jun 2026
Case no.: CRM(A)/330/2026
CNR: WBCHCJ0021432026
Topic: Narcotics (NDPS)
Bench: Shampa Dutt Paul
Disposal: REJECTED
Case type: CRM(A)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Shampa Dutt Paul

Subrata Mallik@Khattu Mallik Vs the State of West Bengal
11 Jun 2026
Prodip Sarkar@Pradip Sarkar and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal
11 Jun 2026
Jahirul Haque and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal
11 Jun 2026
MD Salim and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal
12 Jun 2026
Konika Barman Vs the State of West Bengal
12 Jun 2026
Gopala Krishnan Anantha Seshan and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal and Anr.
12 Jun 2026

Cite this judgement

Bijay Sarkar v. the State of West Bengal, CRM(A)/330/2026 (CAL), decided on 12 June 2026.

The Calcutta High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes4

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973438 · 161
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023482
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 198520(b)(ii)(c)/29

View all statutes

Procedural history1

Phansidewa Police Station Case No. 480 of 2025 dated 08.11.2025 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c)/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985; the learned counsel for the State placed the case diary before the Court.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Shampa Dutt (Paul)

Parties & counsel