24.08.2026 In The High Court at Calcutta Sl. No. 38 Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Court No. 446 Appellate Side Moumita CRM (A) 2262 of 2026 In Re: An application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; And In the matter of : Md. Mainul Khan ……Petitioner. Mr. Soumya Basu Roy Chowdhury Ms. Prajna Paramita Mandal ……for the Petitioner Mr. Malay Dhar ….for the State 1. Parties are present through their respective Counsel. 2. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of the confessional statement of the accused recorded under Section 167 of the NDPS Act. He contends that the statement has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. In such circumstances, according to him, the petitioner the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS may be extended in favour of the petitioner. 3. In the present case, it is alleged that 620 grams of heroin was recovered from one Johirul Haque and, upon enquiry, it transpired that Johirul Haque had obtained the said contraband from the present accused. An independent witness has also deposed against the present accused. The evidentiary 2 value of the confessional statement of the co-accused, from which the name of the petitioner has transpired, would require consideration, including the question as to whether such statement can be relied upon in evidence in view of Section 24 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. At the same time, this Court cannot lose sight of the fact that a substantial quantity, namely 620 grams, of heroin is alleged to have been recovered in the present case. 5. Accordingly, I am of the view that it is not a fit case to extend the benefit under Section 482 of BNSS. The petitioner has also did not produce any material to show that he has been able to with regard to presumption under Section 37 of NDPS Act. 4. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)