✦ Calcutta High Court

NIA SPECIAL CASE No. 5 of 2024 · Calcutta High Court

NIA SPECIAL CASE No. 5 of 2024ARIJIT BANERJEE, APURBA SINHA RAY3 min read

Case at a glance

Bench
ARIJIT BANERJEE, APURBA SINHA RAY

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 66. Accordingly, we direct that the appellant, namely Dhananjoy Gorai @ Dhananjay Garai shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.50,000/-, with five sureties of like amount each, two of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Court…
  • Para 99. The prayer for bail is allowed. CRA (DB) 332 of 2025 is disposed of.

Judgment

Mr. Koushik Chowdhury ……for the Appellant. Mr. Arun Kr. Maiti (Mohanty), Spl. PP Mr. Bhaskar Prosad Banerjee, Spl. PP Mr. Debasish Tandon, PP ……for the NIA. Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J.

1.

This appeal is directed against an order of the NIA Special Court, whereby the appellant’s prayer for bail was rejected.

2.

The appellant says that he is in custody for almost one year three months. Investigation is complete. Charge sheet has been submitted. A co-accused person standing on the same footing has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench by an order dated June 9, 2025, passed in CRA (DB) 108 of

2025. He prays for bail.

3.

Learned Counsel for the NIA strongly opposes the prayer. He says that the present appellant does not stand on the same footing as the co-accused Karimul Khan, who was extended the privilege of bail by a Coordinate Bench. At that time, the charge had not been framed. Now, charge has been 2 framed and trial is in progress. Therefore, bail should not be granted. He further says that the present appellant was found to be in proximity with the person who was carrying explosive which exploded causing that person’s death.

4.

We have considered the facts and circumstances of the case. We see that certain recoveries were made from the present appellant. However, the same was in the case of Karimul Khan, who has been granted bail. We do not see how the present appellant stands on a different footing from Karimul Khan.

5.

On the ground of parity and also considering the period of detention of the appellant, since charge has already been framed, we are inclined to allow the appellant’s prayer for bail.

6.

Accordingly, we direct that the appellant, namely Dhananjoy Gorai @ Dhananjay Garai shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.50,000/-, with five sureties of like amount each, two of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Court, Calcutta under the NIA Act and on further conditions that he shall appear before the Trial Court on every date of hearing and shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever. He shall reside within the municipal limits of Kolkata and/or Bidhannagar Commissionerate and shall provide the address where he shall presently reside to the Investigating Officer as well as to the jurisdictional Court and 3 shall report to SP, NIA, Kolkata, once in a week until further orders.

7.

In the event he fails to appear before the Trial Court without justifiable cause, the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail automatically without reference to this Court.

9.

The prayer for bail is allowed. CRA (DB) 332 of 2025 is disposed of.

10.

All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Arijit Banerjee, J.) (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Calcutta High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. NIA SPECIAL CASE No. 5 of 2024). ← Search more judgments