Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2333/2026 of CHINTU SK Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 27 August 2026
Sl. No.23 Ct. 446/tkm C. R. M. ( A ) 2333 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Lalgola Police Station Case No.12 of 2026 dated 04.01.2026 under sections 21(c)/29 of the NDPS Act And In Re:
27.08.2026
Sl. No.23
Ct. 446/tkm
C. R. M. (A) 2333 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Lalgola Police Station Case No.12 of 2026 dated 04.01.2026 under sections 21(c)/29 of the NDPS Act
And
In Re: Chintu Sk.
… … Petitioner
Allowed
Mr. Tapodip Gupta
Mr. Suman Bhanja
Mr. Golam Ahammed
… … for the petitioner
Mr. Sayan Mukherjee
… … for the State
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.
1. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case solely on the basis of the confessional statement of a co-accused recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. He submits that it is a well-settled proposition of law that such confessional statement has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. The prosecution has failed to bring any material on record to connect the petitioner with the alleged offence, apart from the said confessional statement. He further submits that, taking note of this aspect, a Coordinate Bench of this Court has granted the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS in favour of a co-accused. He produces the order dated 24th July, 2026 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM (A) 2193 of 2026 in support of such contention. The order, as produced by the petitioner, is taken on record. The charge- sheet in the present case has already been submitted.
2. Learned Advocate for the State produces the case diary, memo of evidence and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. In response
2 to a query from this Court, learned Advocate for the State failed to furnish any call detail records (CDR), any evidence regarding the past criminal antecedents of the petitioner, or any material showing his involvement in the money trail.
3. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the materials in the case diary. Having considered that the present petitioner has been implicated solely on the basis of the confessional statement of a co-accused and that there is an absence of any other material, such as CDR, evidence showing his past criminal antecedents, or his involvement in the money trail, and further considering that another co-accused has been granted pre-arrest bail, I am of the view that the same privilege under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioner.
4. Accordingly, I direct that, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Judge, Special Court, under NDPS Act, Berhampore, Murshidabad and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
5. The application being CRM (A) 2333 of 2026 is disposed of.
(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)