Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9368 (CAL)

NIYAJ AHAMED v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (NDPS)/194/2025 · 2025-03-06

Arijit Banerjee, Prasenjit Biswas

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

34 06-03-2025 (ct. no. 29) KOLE Allowed CRM (NDPS) 194 of 2025 In re: An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 483 of the BNSS in connection with Karandighi Police Station Case No. 641 of 2022 dated 16.12.2022 under Sections 21(c)/25/28 of the NDPS Act. - A n d - In the matter of : Niyaj Ahamed .... Petitioner. Mr. Nirupam Dhali, … For the Petitioner. Ms. Faria Hossain, Mr. D. Mondal, … For the State. Order dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J.: 1. Status report filed by the State be kept with the records. 2. The report is not of much use as it does not answer our queries recorded in our order dated February 26, 2025. 3. We see that only 1 out of 13 charge sheet named witnesses has been examined. He is the seizure witness. He has been declared hostile. 4. We also see that examination of PW 1 was completed on May 14, 2024. April 17, 2024 is the next date fixed by the learned trial Court, i.e., 11 months after PW 1 was examined. 5. No doubt, a huge quantity of phensedyl syrup was seized from the possession of the petitioner. However, a very strong prosecution case would not be a justification for keeping an under- trial in judicial custody for an indefinitely long period of time, pending disposal of the trial. The petitioner is in custody for almost two years three months. Only 1 out of 13 charge sheet named witnesses has been examined, who has been declared hostile. There is no possibility of an early conclusion of the trial. 2 6. Ordinarily the fundamental right of a citizen to speedy trial and personal liberty must override all other considerations. The report filed by the State says that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. 7. Hence, without touching the merits of the case and solely on the ground of inordinate delay in progress of the trial and there being no possibility of an early conclusion of the trial, we feel impelled to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 8. Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner, namely, Niyaj Ahamed, shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000/-, with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Learned Special Judge under the NDPS Act, Raiganj, Uttar Dijanpur subject to condition that he shall appear before the trial court on every date of hearing until further orders and shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever and on further condition that the petitioner while on bail shall remain within the jurisdiction of the Raiganj police station and shall meet the O.C./I.C. of concerned police station twice in every week until further orders. 9. In the event the petitioner fails to adhere to any of the conditions stipulated above without justifiable cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the petitioner’s bail in accordance with law without further reference to this court. 10. The application for bail is, accordingly, allowed. 11. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. ( Prasenjit Biswas, J. ) ( Arijit Banerjee, J. )