D/L788 31.08.2026 Bpg. Allowed C.R.M. (NDPS)1809 of 2026 In Re: An application for Bail under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with NDPS Case no.126 of 2021 arising out of NCB Crime No.22/NCB/KOL/2021 dated 01.07.2021 under Sections 8(c) read with Section 21(c)/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985; Bapon Ghosh @ Babon Ghosh Versus Union of India Mr. Tapodip Gupta Mr. Suman Bhanja Mrs. Usashi Chattopadhyay. …for the petitioner. Mr. Arun Kumar Maiti (Mohanty) Ms. Sumita Sarkar. …for the NCB. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for 4 years 1 month. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on 02.04.2026 when there was a direction as a last chance to complete rest of the witnesses. Learned advocate for the NCB has submitted a report. Report reflects that the chemical examiner could not be examined 03.06.2026, 02.07.2026 and 03.07.2026 for which the prosecution cannot be held responsible. Learned advocate refers to the judgment of Union of India vs. Vigin K. Varghese, Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No (s).7768 of 2025 wherein it was held that delay in trial or prolonged incarceration cannot, by itself, justify the grant of bail in 2 cases involving commercial quantity of Narcotic Drugs when the twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act remain intact. I have taken into account the judgment. There are also judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court to the effect that when there is a conflict so far as Section 37 of the NDPS Act is concerned and Article 21 of the Constitution of India is concerned, the Court will lean in favour of liberty of the accused. In order to distinguish the same, Mr. Gupta referred to Vijay Singh Vs. Union of India reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 5304 and stressed upon paragraph 5 of the said judgment which is quoted below: “5. However, time and again, this Court has reminded different States as well as the Narcotic Control Bureau that Article 21 of the Constitution of India over- rides Section 37 of the Act. If there is an undue delay on the part of the prosecution in concluding the trial and that too for no fault on the part of the accused, then accused cannot be kept in jail for indefinite period of time.” This bail application is being considered after four years and there was an opportunity already granted to the prosecuting authorities after a prolonged incarceration. Petitioner has been acquitted in the other cases. Having considered the overall circumstances, I am of the opinion that further detention of the present petitioner is unwarranted. As such, prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. 3 Accordingly, the petitioner, namely, Bapon Ghosh @ Babon Ghosh shall be released on bail upon furnishing bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties of Rs.10,000/- each, one of whom must be local to the satisfaction of the learned Judge, under NDPS Act, 5th Court, Berhampore, Murshidabad. If on bail, the petitioner shall be physically present on each and every date before the learned trial court and shall not leave the district of Murshidabad without prior permission of the learned special court. Thus, CRM(NDPS) 1809 of 2026 is allowed. Report submitted by the NCB be kept with the record. All 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 of all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)