1 D/L31 19.06.2025 Rohit ct.no.29 C.R.M. (NDPS) 433 of 2025 In Re: An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Raghunathganj Police Station Case No. 362 of 2018 dated 02.08.2018 under Sections 21(C)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. And In Re: Raj Kumar Ghosh @ Fouji …Petitioner Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee Mr. Ankan Das …for the petitioner Ms. Anasuya Sinha, Ld. A.P.P Md. Kutubuddin …for the State It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner was granted statutory bail/ default bail vide order dated 30/01/2019 by the trial court. The petitioner was also entangled with another ST Case No. 2(03)/2019 in respect of which he was acquitted by an order dated 19th October, 2023. On the basis of such judgment he was set free on 01.12.2023. Learned Trail Court by an order dated 14.12.2023 recorded that the petitioner is in custody in connection with another case being Raghunathganj P.S. Case No. 679 of 2023 and for which he issued production warrant against the present petitioner Raj Kumar Ghosh. However, on the very next dated i.e. on 17.02.2024 when Raj Kumar Ghosh was found absent the trial court issued warrant of arrest and on the basis of the same he was arrested on 04.09.2024 and since then he is in custody. Petitioner further submits that though the charge has been framed in the present case but trial has not yet been commenced and the prosecution proposes to examine 13 witnesses and as such there is no 2 requirement of keeping him behind the bar any further. Accordingly, petitioner prayed for bail on any terms and conditions. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that it is true that the petitioner was earlier granted bail in connection with the present case but, thereafter when he was set free on 01.12.2023 he did not appear before the court and for which at first warrant of arrest and thereafter warrant of proclamation and warrant of attachment were issued against the petitioner. Petitioner could be arrested on the strength of such warrant on 04.09.2024. Moreover the petitioner has criminal antecedence and about 14 cases are pending against him. He further submits that the prayer for bail of the present petitioner was rejected by this Court only on 25.2.2025 observing that the petitioner was arrested only after warrant of arrest was being issued against him and that the case is fixed for evidence on behalf of the prosecution side. I have considered submissions made by both the parties. It appears that though it was recorded by the order dated 25.02.2025 that the prosecution is likely to examine 13 witnesses and the progress with schedule for recording the evidence of the prosecution was fixed but it is submitted that no progress regarding recording of the evidence of the prosecution has taken place since then. Prosecution proposes to examine 13 witnesses and as such nobody knows when the trial would be concluded and as such I am of the view that no fruitful purpose will be served by detaining the accused any further in the custody. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is considered and allowed. Accordingly, the petitioner namely, Raj Kumar Ghosh @ Fouji shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.20,000/- with two registered sureties of Rs.10,000/-, of which one must be local, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Berhampore, Murshidabad and also on condition that he shall not mis-use the liberty 3 granted by this Court and he shall not tamper with any evidence orally or documentary during the trial. He shall not absent himself on any day during trial and shall not commit any offence while on bail. He shall give his mobile phone number to the local police station and shall not change it without prior permission of the trial court and he shall not in any manner try to delay the trial and also on condition that the petitioner shall not leave the geographic limit of district Murshidabad without the leave of the court and also on condition that the petitioner will meet the O.C/I.C of Raghunathganj P.S. thrice in a week till further order and that the petitioner will not enter within the jurisdiction of Raghunathganj P.S without the leave of the court except for the purpose of attending the P.S. The court below will be at liberty to cancel the bail in the event of violation of any of the conditions without making any reference to this Court. Be it mentioned, that anything said herein shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merit of the case. Accordingly, CRM (NDPS) 433 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.)