02.09.2026 Sl.No. 5 Ct. 39 Allowed Amalranjan In The High Court At Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side CRM (A) No. 2013 of 2026 In Re: An application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/corresponding to under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; filed in connection with N. Case No. 37/2025, arising out of Bizpur Police Station Case No. 246 of 2025 dated 05.12.2025 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c ) of the NDPS Act, now numbered as N-37 of 2025. -And- In the matter of : Ajay Shaw … Petitioner Mr. Debasis Kar Mr. Arka Tilak Bhadra Ms. Paramita Mukherjee ….for the petitioner Mr. Rajesh Kr. Shah ……..for the State 1. Memo of evidence, filed by the State, is taken on record. 2. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the present petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He is not an FIR named accused. He has been implicated only on the basis of the statement of the co-accused. No recovery has been made from his conscious possession. He further submits that out of 5 cases, he is on regular bail in two cases. He has not been convicted in any of the cases yet and is just an accused. He cannot be treated as 2 a convict. He prays for anticipatory bail on any terms and conditions. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State produces the memo of evidence and case diary and he contends that the petitioner has previous antecedents in connection with the NDPS cases as well as other offence of IPC and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the present petitioner. 4. Having heard the learned counsels for the respective parties and on perusal of the materials available on record, memo of evidence as well as the case diary including the statement of the victim, this court finds that the present petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of the statement of the co- accused. It is true that several cases are pending against him and he was in custody in one NDPS case. However, it is well settled law that custody in another case will not prevent him to pray for anticipatory bail. In this context, the petitioner relied upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 2501 of 2024 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 6942 of 2024) dated 09.09.2024, Dhanraj Aswani Vs. Amar S. Mulchandani & Anr. reported in 2024 SCCF Online Sc 2453, particularly paragraphs nos. 56, 60 and 66 whereby it was held that when a person is taken into custody in any 3 other cases, he may apply for anticipatory bail in another case instituted against him. 5. Upon overall consideration of the case, this court is of the opinion that this is a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner since no call details and money have been found against him and he has been implicated in this case based on the statement of the co-accused which is not admissible in law. 6. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, namely, Ajay Shaw is allowed. 7. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on the terms and conditions as he deems fit and proper and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 8. In the event the petitioner fails to comply with any of the conditions mentioned above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to pray for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted by this Court in accordance with law. 9. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. 10. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court. 4 11. Concerned Department is directed to supply certified copies of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. ( Ajay Kumar Gupta, J. )