Judgment · High Court

Mr. Santanu Talukdar Mr. Manojit Debnath Ms. Amita Gaur Ms. Mamata Jana …for the Petitioner. … for the State. Prosecution case is that 28 kgs of Ganja was recovered from three accused persons and the petitioner is one of them who is in custody for about one year. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a lady accused and she is eighty per cent physically disabled and that, charge-sheet submitted on 6th August, 2024 and the charge was also framed against the three accused persons on 11th September, 2024 and the prosecution proposes to examine fourteen witnesses, out of which they could not complete examination of a single witness and, as such, nobody knows when the trial would be concluded and, as such, she may be released on bail on any terms and conditions. 2 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposed to the bail prayer contending that commercial quantity of narcotic substance was recovered from the joint possession of the present petitioner and that, the bail prayer of the present petitioner was rejected by this Court on 13th November, 2024. She further submits that the trial could be concluded within a short span of time and if, she is released on bail at this stage there is every livelihood of her abscontion to evade the trial. I have considered the submissions made on behalf of both the parties and that, the commercial quantity of narcotic substance was recovered from the possession of the present petitioner and that the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act clearly attracts in respect of the present petitioner and, as such, the prayer for bail is considered and rejected. Accordingly, CRM (NDPS) 829 of 2025 is disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)