Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 31773 (CAL)

MRITUNJOY MANDAL @ BYENKA v. UNION OF INDIA

CRM (A)/1324/2026 · 2026-07-31

Tirthankar Ghosh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

31.07.2026 Court No.35. D/L. 8. Kausik (Rejected) CRM (A) 1324 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with NCB Crime No. 15/NCB/Kol/2024 dated 06.09.2024 under Sections 8(C) read with 21(C) and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. And In the matter of : Mritunjoy Mandal @ Byenka ……Petitioner. Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Avik Ghatak Mr. Dibyo Mukherjee Mr. M. Mazumder ……for the Petitioner. Mr. Arun Kumar Maiti (Mohanty) Mr. R.R. Mohanty ……for the NCB. Learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that similarly placed accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail. To that effect, learned senior advocate for the petitioner refers to the orders passed in CRM (A) 397 of 2026 and CRM (A) 1047 of 2026. It has been submitted that petitioner is innocent of the charges and has been implicated by the Investigating Authorities on the basis of vague statements. There are no materials to connect the petitioners and the basis, on which the petitioner has been dragged in the present case, are certain mobile calls and to that effect also the prosecution could not 2 connect the petitioner with the name of the person in whose particulars SIM card has been registered. Learned advocate for the NCB submits that the prosecution case is that, the present petitioner engaged different persons for collecting Phensedyl or other cough syrup from different sources and was the recipient of such huge amount of consignment. Learned advocate for the NCB further submits that there is a specific case of the prosecution that petitioner was in touch with different persons. To that effect, reference was made to paragraph 61 of the complaint which has been submitted before the Court :- 61. The CDR linkage of the mobile numbers used by him is as follows: First Party Second Party Role of second party Link Established Byenka @ Mritunjay Mondal 9547980115 8972722067 7384920410 (Nitai) Nitai arranges the line under instructions from Gautam 315 Calls 7384153075 (Palash) Monitors Sales from the godown 02 Calls at seizure time (Shuvo Ghosh) 8597239932 8927117434 Lineman/Escort member 314 Calls (Kousik Halder) 7602550274 8348912956 Lineman/Escort member 526 Calls 3 I have taken into account the subject matter of the case which relates to alleged recovery of 14998 bottles of Phensedyl, the complicity of the present petitioner as has been alleged in the complaint and the distinctive features which are available so far as the complicity of the present petitioner. I find that the complaint was filed on 23rd March, 2025. It has been submitted that in spite of notices having been served under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, the petitioner did not participate at the time of investigation. The seizure was carried out in the year 2024. Having regard to the overall circumstances and the present stage of the case, I am not inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the present petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner in CRM (A) 1324 of 2026 is dismissed. Report submitted by the NCB be kept with the record. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order 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.)