Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/3019/2026 of KAHABAT MIA @ KAHABOT MOMIN Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 22 September 2026
no. 30 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court) CRM ( A ) 3019 of 2026 In re : An Application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023/under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with Kaliachak PS Case No. 246 of 2026 dated 19.02.2026 u/s 21(c)/25/27A/29 of the NDPS Act. -And- In the matter of :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
22.09.2026 Serial no. 30 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court)
CRM (A) 3019 of 2026
In re : An Application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023/under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with Kaliachak PS Case No. 246 of 2026 dated 19.02.2026 u/s 21(c)/25/27A/29 of the NDPS Act.
-And-
In the matter of : Kahabat Mia @ Kahabot Momin
… Petitioner(s)
Md. Wasim Akram Ms. S. Parveen
… for the petitioner(s)
Ms. Arushi Rathore Mr. Rohan Bavishi
… for the State-respondent(s)
Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in connection with the instant case. There are no materials to suggest the complicity of the present petitioner and the petitioner has been implicated in the instant case only on the basis of statement of a co-accused. Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there was alleged recovery of 1024 bottles of codeine mixture. The petitioner was present at the spot and thereafter fled away as has been stated by the witnesses. Additionally, it has been submitted that the petitioner is also implicated in connection with another case under the NDPS Act being Baishnabnagar PS Case No. 463 of 2023 dated 19.07.2023. Having considered the overall circumstances and the fact that the petitioner is having the criminal antecedent, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present petitioner. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is Rejected. Accordingly, CRM (A) 3019 of 2026 is dismissed. Memo of evidence submitted be kept with the record. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)