The High Court · 2025
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 09 Sep 2025
- Bench
- SHABBAR RASHIDI
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 482
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ss. 21(c), 22(c), 23(c), 27A, 28, 37
- Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 ss. 27, 27(b)(2), 27A
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. C.R.M. (A) 2422 of 2026 is dismissed. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.) ABHIJIT DAS 16:35:22 +05'30'
Judgment
Mr. Kaushik Choudhury, Advocate Mr. Dwaipayan Panda, Advocate …for the petitioner Mr. Prabir Banerjee, Advocate Mr. Koustav Lal Mukherjee, Advocate … for the State
Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the present petitioner. He has been implicated in this case on the basis of the statement of co-accused made while in custody. Moreover, investigation of the case has already concluded in a charge sheet. He prays for anticipatory bail.
On the other hand, learned Advocate appearing for the State refers to the materials in the case diary. He submits that at least four cases were registered involving NDPS Act, 1985 as against the present petitioner. 2
Considering the aforesaid circumstances as well as the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is not able to overcome the restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985.
Consequently, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.
C.R.M. (A) 2422 of 2026 is dismissed. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.) ABHIJIT DAS 16:35:22 +05'30'
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — ss. 21(c), 22(c), 23(c), 27A, 28, 37; Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 — ss. 27, 27(b)(2), 27A.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Calcutta High Court, on 09 Sep 2025. The bench was SHABBAR RASHIDI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.