Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 37431 (CAL)

SUBRATA GHOSH v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (NDPS)/1822/2026 · 2026-09-01

Tirthankar Ghosh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

01.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L. 56. Kausik CRM (NDPS) 1822 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Nabadwip Police Station Case No. 76 of 2025 dated 03.02.2025 under Sections 20(b)(ii)C of the NDPS Act, 1985. And In the matter of : Subrata Ghosh ……Petitioner. Mr. Rana Mukherjee Mr. Pratap Kumar Yadav ……for the Petitioner. Mr. Suman Agarwal Mr. Arijit Banik ……for the State. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 3rd February, 2025. Majority of the witnesses have been examined. One of the seizure list witnesses did not support the seizure. State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the evidence of one more seizure list witness is left. The Investigating Officer is also yet to be examined. In view of the fact that two more witnesses are to be examined and the petitioner is in custody for more than one and a half years, I direct the learned Trial Court to complete the aforesaid two witnesses within a period of 4 months from the next date fixed. 2 If, inspite of co-operation extended by the accused, the evidence of the two witnesses cannot be completed within the aforesaid schedule directed by this Court, learned Trial Court would release the petitioner on bail on such terms and conditions as it deems fit and proper for ensuring further appearance. It is directed that the trial of the case would continue in spite of any resolution of the local bar and no unnecessary adjournment be granted to any of the parties. The prayer for bail at this stage is rejected. Trial Court is directed to adhere to the directions passed above. With the aforesaid observations CRM (NDPS) 1822 of 2026 is disposed of. Memo of Evidence submitted 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.)