NAJMUL MONDAL @ NAJMAL MONDAL @ NAJMUL MANDAL v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
CRM (A)/20/2026 · 2026-01-28
Jay Sengupta
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4154 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4154 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
28/01/2026 D/L – 37 Court No.28 S. Kundu Rejected C.R.M.(A) 20 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023. In connection with Patiram P.S case no. 58 of 2025 dated 16/3/2025 under sections 21(c)/22C/23C/27A of the NDPS Act. In the matter of: Najmul Mondal @ Najmal Mondal @ Najmul Mandal ...Petitioner. Mr. Aniruddha Bhattacharyya Mr. Uttam Mukherjee Ms. Anushka Bose Ms. Rai Das …for the petitioner. Mr. Md. Adil Badr Mr. Md. Kutubuddin …for the State.
1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. Other than the statement of a co- accused, there is no other incriminating material available against the petitioner. Charge-sheet has been submitted.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the State relies on the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that similarly circumstanced co-accused were denied the benefit of anticipatory by this Court on 9.12.2025 in CRM (A) 3694 of 2025. Apart from the statements of co-accused, there are statements of two other co-villagers who have implicated the present petitioner. The prosecution case is that the some other co-accused were caught in the act of throwing gunny
2
bags beyond the Bangladesh Border. They were apprehended with the contraband. Some others fled away and the petitioner was one of them.
3. Considering the above and the other incriminating materials available in the case diary and the restrictions contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, I do not consider this to be a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Jay Sengupta, J.)