Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2591 (CAL)

MAJIDUL HAQUE v. UNION OF INDIA

CRM (A)/4234/2025 · 2026-01-05

Jay Sengupta

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

AD 87 January 5, 2026 Ct. 28 SG CRM(A) 4234 of 2025 Reject An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with NCB Crime No.17/NCB/KOL/2025 dated 28.07.2025 under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. And In the matter of: Majidul Haque … petitioner Mr. Prajnadeepta Roy Mr. Sabir Ali Ms. Sohini Kundu Mr. Debojyoti Goswami Mr. Jaimallya Bhattacharya Ms. Anjalika Sarkar … for the petitioner Mr. Anirban Mitra Mr. Sagar Saha ... for the NCB Report filed by the State is taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only material available against the petitioner is a statement of a co-accused which is not admissible in evidence. The petitioner was served with notice under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. Learned counsel for the NCB strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that other than the statement of a co-accused there are phone call records between the petitioner and the principal accused at the relevant time that would implicate the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is the main supplier of narcotic drugs. 2 Considering the above, the other materials available in the case diary and the restrictions contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, rejected. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of requisite formalities. (Jay Sengupta, J.)