Calcutta High Court
CRM (NDPS)/1806/2026 of JAGADISH MANDAL Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 18 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.M/L.280 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected C.R.M. (NDPS) 1806 of 2026 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Kaliachak Police Station Case No. 2010
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.
18.09.2026
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.M/L.280
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected
C.R.M. (NDPS) 1806 of 2026
In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, filed in connection with Kaliachak Police Station Case No. 2010 of 2025 dated 06.12.2025 under Sections 21(c)/25/27A/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Section 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
And
In Re : Jagadish Mandal
... Petitioner.
Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Dattatreya Dutta
... For the Petitioner. Mr. Kallol Mondal, Ld. PP, Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta, Ms. Jayashree Patra
... For the State.
Learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that he intends to canvass on two issues, firstly relating to the fact that no videography was done on 07.01.2026 when seizure was effected from the garment shop of the petitioner; another issue which has been canvassed is that the chemical examiner’s report do not quantify the ingredients particularly when 310 grams of Brown Sugar was recovered which is just above the commercial quantity. Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the total recovery in the present case is 1812 grams of Brown Sugar. There was an initial seizure on or about 06.12.2025; in course of investigation, petitioner was traced out and thereafter seizures were effected pursuant to statement made by the present petitioner. It has also been submitted that all the accused persons presently have been arrested and the case is ready for further progress. Having considered the total quantum of seizure in the present case and primarily there are documents to substantiate that the seizures which were effected were videographed, I am of the opinion that at this stage, no case is made out for the petitioner’s release on bail as the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. As such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Learned Trial Court is directed to take steps for overcoming the stage of consideration of charges, priority be given to the evidence of all the seizure list witnesses in the present case. Petitioner will renew his prayer for bail after the evidence of seizure list witnesses is over. Memo of Evidence submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record. The application for bail, being CRM (NDPS) 1806 of 2026, is, thus, disposed of. All concerned 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 with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)