Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7307 (CAL)

ABDUR RAHIM @ MD ABDUR RAHIM v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (NDPS)/136/2025 · 2025-02-26

Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

26.02.2025 Item no. 37. Court No.29. AB (Allowed) CRM (NDPS) 136 of 2025 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Lalgola Police Station Case No.238 of 2021 Dated 24.04.2021 under Section 21C/29 of the NDPS Act read with Sections 13/14 of the Foreigners Act And In the matter of : Abdur Rahim @ Md. Abdur Rahim ……Petitioner. Mr. Arnab Chatterjee, Ms. Poulami Bose ……for the Petitioner. Mr. Avishek Sinha, Mr. Soumyadeep Saha ……for the State. Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J. 1. The petitioner renews his prayer for bail which was last rejected by us on September 26, 2024, in CRM (NDPS) 1372 of 2024. While rejecting his bail prayer, we had directed learned Trial Court to expedite the trial to the fullest extent and conclude the same on an early date and definitely by the end of the year, if necessary, by preponing the next date fixed for recording of evidence. We had granted liberty to the petitioner to renew his bail prayer if the trial did not conclude by delivery of judgment within the time period indicated in the order dated September 26, 2024. 2. Today learned State Advocate files a status report. Let the same be kept with the records. 2 3. Referring to the status report, learned State Counsel tells us that one more prosecution witness will be examined. The next date fixed is March 13, 2025. Huge quantity of contraband items was recovered from the petitioner, who is a Bangladeshi national. 4. We find that the petitioner is in custody for more than three years and ten months. In spite of the earlier direction of this Court, the trial has not concluded within the time period specified. 5. On the ground of lengthy detention of the petitioner and on the touchstone of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, without touching the merits of the case and solely on the ground of delay in trial, even though the petitioner is a foreign national, we are inclined to grant him bail. 6. Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner, namely ABDUR RAHIM @ MD. ABDUR RAHIM shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions. (a) Execution of bond with two sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each of Indian citizens ; (b) He specifies verifiable address of stay after release; (c) Biometric of his iris (if possible) and all ten fingerprints and photos shall be captured and stored in a secured database before release from the detention centres. He shall remain within the jurisdiction of the Berhampore Police Station and shall report once every week to the Berhampore Police Station; 3 (d) He shall notify any change of his address to the specified Police Station on the same day and (e) A quarterly report to be submitted by the Superintendent of Police (Border) to the Foreigners Tribunal regarding appearance of such released declared foreigner to concerned Police Station and in case of violation of condition, the DFN will be apprehended and produced before Foreigners Tribunal. 7. The petitioner shall appear before the trial court /tribunal on every date of hearing until further orders and shall not intimidate the witnesses and/or tamper with evidence and/or commit any cognizable offence in any manner whatsoever. 8. In the event the petitioner fails to adhere to any of the conditions stipulated above without justifiable cause, the trial court/tribunal shall be at liberty to cancel the petitioner’s bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court. 9. The application for bail is, accordingly, allowed. 10. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.) (Arijit Banerjee, J.) 4