22. 17-03-2025 (ct. no.29) (allowed) debajyoti CRM (NDPS) 228 of 2025 In re: An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure/483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in connection with NCB Crime No.06/NCB/Kol/2022 under Sections 8(C) read with Sections 21(c)/20(b)(ii)(B)/25/28/29/54 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. - A n d – In the matter of : Krishnapada Paul .... Petitioner. Mr. Angshuman Chakraborty, Mr. Shashankha Shekhar Saha … For the Petitioner. Mr. Himangshu De, Sr. Adv., Mr. Arunava Ganguly … For UOI (NCB). Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J. 1. The petitioner renews his prayer for bail which was rejected earlier on January 16, 2024 with a direction to the trial Court “to conduct the trial with utmost expedition by fixing schedules at short intervals and conclude the same at an early date preferably within one year from the next date fixed for recording evidence without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties”. 2. Learned advocate for the petitioner says that the said direction has had no effect. The petitioner is in custody for over 3 years 1 month. He is not responsible for the delay in progress of the trial. He prays for bail on the touchstone of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 2 3. Learned advocate for Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) says that huge quantity of contraband items were recovered from the accused persons including this petitioner. One of the accused persons is absconding. That has caused the delay. Only 7 more witnesses will be examined by the prosecution. At this stage, the prayer for bail should not be granted. 4. From the list of dates filed before us on behalf of NCB, we find that on several dates the prosecution witness was absent before the learned trial Court. On other occasions, the Presiding Officer was on leave. We do not see that this petitioner can be said to be responsible for the delay. 5. 3 years 1 month is a very long period of time to detain an under-trial accused in judicial custody. Although learned advocate for NCB says that the trial should be concluded within the next five months, we do not see that there is a real possibility of early conclusion given the manner in which the trial has proceeded so far. 6. Hence, without touching the merits of the case and solely on the ground of delay and consideration of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, we allow the petitioner’s prayer for bail. 7. Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner, namely, Krishnapada Paul, shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand), with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Barasat, North 24 Parganas. The petitioner shall appear before the learned trial Court on every date of hearing and shall not intimidate the witnesses and/or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever and/or commit any cognizable offence in any manner whatsoever. The petitioner 3 shall remain within the jurisdiction of Barasat Police Station and shall report to the Officer-in-Charge/Inspector-in-Charge of Barasat Police Station once in a week, until further orders. The petitioner shall, through his learned advocate, inform the learned trial Court, NCB and Barasat Police Station his current local address at Barasat where he shall be residing while on bail. 8. In the event the petitioner fails to comply with any of the conditions stipulated above, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court. 9. The application for bail is, thus, allowed. 10. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 11. Criminal Section is directed to supply certified copies of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (Arijit Banerjee, J.) (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)