32 12.08.2026 Court No.09. (D.Hira) (Rejected) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI APPELLATE SIDE CRM (NDPS) 401 of 2026 In Re: - An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Falakata Police Station Case No. 238 of 2026 dated 18.04.2026 under Sections 21(c)/25/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. - And - In the matter of: - Sri Saroj Kumar Sha. ..…petitioner. Mr. Kalipada Das, Ms. Saheli Roy Dakua. …for the petitioner. Mr. Avrojyoti Das, ld. APP., Mr. Bijay Bikram Das, Mr. Tapas Prasad. … for the State 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 18.04.2026. 2. The FSL report shows that the Tramadol substance is within the purview of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 but the other components that is, Acetaminophen and Dicyclomine HC 2 are non-contraband materials. 3. The FSL report shows that each tablet contains 10% of the tramadol and therefore, the petitioner cannot be entangled in this 2 case for having possessed contraband articles more than commercial quantity. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the definition of term ‘preparation’ of Section 2(xx) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The said section laid down that “in relation to a narcotic drug or psychotropic substance, means any one or more such drugs or substances in dosage form or any solution or mixture, in whatever physical state, containing one or more such drugs or substances”. 5. Learned counsel for the State has also pointed out as 19,200 tablets containing tramadol were recovered and if the contention of the petitioner is found to be correct, then, in that case also, it goes to show that the petitioner was possessing more than 1920 grams of contraband substance which is above the commercial quantity. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the calculation as mentioned by the learned counsel for the State is not correct. The total weight of contraband article in possession of the petitioner was 192 grams which is below the commercial quantity of the 250 grams. 7. I have found that there is no specific categorization in the contents of the FSL report. However, in view of Section 2(xx) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, I find that the prosecution’s contentions have certain merits in this regard. 3 8. In view of such materials on record, I am not inclined to grant the prayer for bail at this stage. 9. The application for bail is, thus, rejected. 10. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 11. Criminal Section is directed to supply certified copies of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)