SABIR AHAMED @ SABIR AHAMMED v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
CRM (NDPS)/955/2026 · 2026-06-17
Tirthankar Ghosh
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 23500 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 23500 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
17.06.2026
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.147
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected C.R.M. (NDPS) 955 of 2026
In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Lalgola Police Station Case No. 835 of 2024 dated 12.08.2024 under Sections 21(c)/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
And
In Re : Sabir Ahamed @ Sabir Ahammed
... Petitioner.
Mr. Arnab Chatterjee, Mr. Avik Ghosh, Ms. Ankusha Ghosh
... For the Petitioner.
Mr. Rajendra Banerjee, APP, Mr. Bikash Kumar Singh
... For the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 12.08.2024 and has been implicated in connection with the instant case for alleged recovery of 1 kg. 200 grams of Heroin. Till date, only one witness has been examined out of 16 witnesses cited by the prosecution. Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the quantity of contraband seized is of commercial quantity. Having considered the quantum of seizure in the present case, I am of the opinion that although the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted, but for indefinite period an accused cannot be detained in custody. Petitioner is already in custody for 1 year 8 months. As such, another four months’ time is granted to the prosecution atleast to
2 complete examination of five more witnesses including the seizure list witnesses. At this stage, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Petitioner will renew his prayer for bail after the aforesaid time period is over. The application for bail, being CRM (NDPS) 955 of 2026, is, thus, disposed of. The Memo of Evidence submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record. All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)