Research › Search › Judgment
Calcutta High Court · body
2025 DAILYLAW 37353 (CAL)
MD KAMRUJJAMAN @ KAMU @ MD KAMARUJJAMAN v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
CRM (NDPS)/1032/2025 · 2025-08-27
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee
body2025
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37353 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37353 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
27.08.2025 akb Sl. 29 Ct.29 Allowed
CRM (NDPS) No. 1032 of 2025
In re: An application for bail under Section 483 of the BNSS Act, 2023 filed in connection with NDPS Case No. 31 of 2025, arising out of Lalgola Police Station Case No. 142 of 2025 dated 19.02.2025 under Section 21©/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. And In re: Khamrujjaman @ Kamu @ Md Kamarujjaman … petitioner. Mr. Sabir Ahmed Mr. Somnath Adhikary
…for the petitioner
Mr. Samarjit Balial
…for the State
Mr. Ahmed, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that nothing was recovered from the possession of the present petitioner and he is in custody for about 70 days. He further submits that charge sheet has already been submitted on 26th July, 2025 . His further contention is one co-accused namely Sagar Sarkar has already obtained bail in C.R.M.(NDPS) 758 of 2025 and he is almost on the same footing and he may be released on bail on any terms and conditions. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that 80 bottles of phensedyl was recovered from the possession Jahangir Kabir and Kabir Ali and he candidly submits that the name of the present petitioner transpired from the co-accused statement and nothing was recovered from his possession. He further submits that during investigation no criminal antecedent has also been detected and there is no allegation of money trailing against the present petitioner. Having heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the State and that the petitioner is almost on the same
2 footing with that of the co-accused Sagar Sarkar, whose name also transpired from the co-accused statement and that since no contraband was recovered from the possession of the present petitioner rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act may not attract in respect of the present petitioner. Furthermore, investigation has already been ended in a charge sheet and as such no fruitful purpose will be served by detaining him custody any further. In such circumstances, the prayer for bail is allowed. Accordingly, petitioner namely Khamrujjaman @ Kamu @ Md Kamarujjaman, shall be enlarged on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two registered sureties of Rs.
10,000/- each, one of whom must be local, subject to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Murshidabad, Berhampore and on condition that he will not leave the geographical limit of district –Murshidabad without taking permission from the Trial Court and also on condition that he will meet O.C./I.C. Lalgola Police Station twice in a week till further order and also on condition that the accused shall not mis-use the liberty 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. 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 nothing said herein shall be construed as
3 an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The application for bail being CRM (NDPS) 1032 of 2025 is, accordingly allowed and 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.)