DISTRICT: 24 PARGANAS NORTH

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION

C.R.M No. of 2018

In the matter of:

An application under Section 439 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure,

1973;

And

In the matter of:

An order dated 14th December, 2018

passed by the Learned Additional

Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Barasat,

24 Parganas (North) thereby rejecting

the Petitioner’s prayer for bail in

connection with N-143/15 arising

out of Minakhan Police Station Case

No. 270 dated 02.08.2015 under

Sections 20 (b) (ii) (C) of the Narcotic

Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

Act, 1985;
 2

And

In the matter of:

Sourav Mridha @ Shibu,

Son of Dinobondhu Mridha @

Dinabamdhu Mridha,

Of 3 No. Rajob Pally (Godown Para),

Post Office: Gotra, Police Station:

Basirhat, District: 24 Parganas

(North), PIN Code: __________;

…. Accused/Petitioner

(In Judicial Custody)

Versus

The State of West Bengal

….. Opposite Party

To,

The Hon’ble Biswanath Somadder, Acting Chief Justice and His

companion Justices of the said Hon’ble Court.

The humble petition on behalf of the

Accused/Petitioner above named

Most Respectfully Sheweth:

1. That the Accused/Petitioner states that earlier he did not refer any
 3

application for bail before this Hon’ble Court thereby praying for similar

relied in connection with the instant case. On 14th December, 2018 he

preferred an application for bail before the Learned Additional Sessions

Judge, 6th Court, Barasat, 24 Parganas (North) (hereinafter referred to as

the ‘Learned Judge’) and the same was turned down by the Learned Judge

vide order dated 14th December, 2018.

Certified copy of all orders including the order dated 14th December,

2018 passed in connection with the instant case by the Learned Additional

Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Barasat, 24 Parganas (North) in connection

with the instant criminal proceeding is attached with the instant

application.

2. That the Accused/Petitioner states that he is a day labour by

profession. The Accused/Petitioner further states that till date the

Petitioner has always acted and/or conducted himself in accordance with

the provisions of law, equity, social norms and practice.

3. That the Accused/Petitioner states that he is a peace loving and law-

abiding citizen of India, having his permanent residence at the address

mentioned in the cause title.

4. That on the basis of a letter of complaint lodged by one Utpal Saha,

 4

Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Minakhan Police Station, (hereinafter

referred to as the Complainant), addressed to the Officer-in-Charge of

Minakhan Police Station, the instant case being Minakhan Police Station

Case No. 270 dated 02.08.2015 was registered for investigation under

Section 20 (b) (ii) (C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

Act, 1985 against the Accused/Petitioner.

5. That the Accused/Petitioner states that he was arrested in

connection with the instant case on 02nd August, 2015 and subsequently

was produced before the Learned Court. The Accused/Petitioner states

that since then he is in custody in connection with the instant case and

as such he is in custody for about 3 years and 7 months 24 days in

connection with the same. The Accused/Petitioner further states that till

date there is snail progress in trial of the instant case and as such the

Accused/Petitioner is unnecessarily detained in this case.

6. That the Accused/Petitioner states that after completion of

perfunctory investigation in connection with the instant case the

investigating agency submitted Charge Sheet vide Charge Sheet No. 334

dated 29.09.2015 against the Accused/Petitioner for commission of the

alleged offences punishable under Sections 20 (b) (ii) (C) of the Narcotic

Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The investigating agency

 5

submitted the chemical report along with the Charge Sheet in connection

with the instant case.

7. That the allegations made against the Accused/Petitioner in the

instant case brief are as follows:

On or about 02nd August, 2015 at about 23.45 hrs., the

Complainant pursuant to a source information apprehended the Accused

/Petitioner with ganja of 25 kgs, for which the Accused/Petitioner could

not give any probable explanation. It is further alleged that the members

of the raiding party in compliance with all mandatory provisions pertaining

to search and seizure of the contrabands, caused search and seizure of 25

kgs ganja from the possession of the Accused/ Petitioner.

It is further stated that during investigation the investigating officer

also visited the Place of Occurrence, examined the witnesses, recorded

their statements, seized the relevant materials, sent the seized contraband

for chemical examination, collected the report and prima-facie came to the

conclusion that the Accused/Petitioner is guilty for commission of the

alleged offences punishable under Sections 20 (b) (ii) (C) of the Narcotic

Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

A copy of the Charge Sheet as submitted in connection with the

instant case is annexed hereto and marked with the letter ‘A’.
 6

8. That the Accused/Petitioner states that true and proper

appreciation of the materials on record especially the seizure list of the

instant case and Letter of Complaint as submitted in connection with the

instant case would unerringly reveal that there are severe anomalies as to

compliance of the mandatory provisions of law regarding search and

seizure of the alleged contrabands from the possession of the Accused/

Petitioner. It is needless to mention that the anomalies are so grave in

nature that the same would assail the very plank of the prosecution case

as well as upheld the contention of the Accused/Petitioner that he has

been falsely implicated as an accused in connection with the instant case

at the instance of the investigating agency.

9. That the Accused/Petitioner states that the true and proper

appreciation of the materials on record as well as the mode and manner

in which the prosecution story has been narrated, will casts reasonable

doubt regarding the veracity of the allegations leveled against him. Your

Petitioner further states that though the investigating agency claimed that

they have complied with the mandatory requirements of law for causing

search and seizure of the contrabands from the possession of the

Petitioner but actually they did not do the same. It is palpable from the

materials on record that the complainant and/or the seizing officers of the
 7

instant case never intended to comply with the mandatory provisions of

law relating to search and seizure of the alleged contrabands from the

possession of the Accused/Petitioner in its true and proper manner and

they have acted in a most mechanical, malicious and casual manner for

falsely implicating the Accused/Petitioner in connection with the instant

case.

10. That the Accused/Petitioner states that since the protections

available under the provision of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic

Substances Act, 1985 relating to search and seizure of the alleged

contrabands from the possession of the Accused/Petitioner is the only

protection available to him from being subjected to malicious prosecution

and the same creates an unconditional right in favour of the Accused/

Petitioner, there must be proper and full compliance of such mandatory

provisions of law and the plea of substantial compliance of the same,

would not suffice the purpose. Non-compliance of such mandatory

provisions of law would render the recovery of the alleged contrabands as

illegal one and hence the prosecution of the Accused/Petitioner for

recovery of such alleged contrabands also becomes an impossible one.

11. That the Accused/Petitioner submits that near about 6 months have

been taken to frame charge against the Accused/ Petitioner for

 8

commission of the alleged offences and 6 dates were fixed in between. The

Accused/Petitioner states that ultimately on 01st March, 2016 charge was

framed against him in connection with the instant case. True and proper

appreciation of the materials on record would further reveal that on 29th

March, 2016, the Learned Judge was pleased to fix 13th May, 2016 to 17th

May, 2016 as next date for adducing evidence on behalf of the prosecution.

Since no witness was present entire schedule was cancelled and next date

was fixed on 08th August, 2016 to 10th August, 2016. During this schedule

only one witness has been examined in connection with the instant case

and next schedule was fixed on 04th January, 2017 to 06th January, 2017.

On the schedules fixed from 04th January, 2017 to 06th January, 2017,

17th April, 2017 to 19th April, 2017, 30th June, 2017 to 03rd July, 2017,

23rd August, 2017 to 24th August, 2017, 19th January, 2018 to 22nd

January, 2018, 17th April, 2018 to 19th April, 2018 no witness was present

and the case was adjourned on the prayer of prosecution in a most

credulous manner without appreciating the agony and pain of

incarceration of the Accused/Petitioner.

12. That the Accused/Petitioner states that again on 04th August, 2018

and 06th August, 2018 the case was again adjourned. Ultimately on 07th

August, 2018 PW-2 was examined and cross examined in connection with
 9

the instant case. Again on 01st December, 2018, 03rd December, 2018, 25th

February, 2019 and 26th February, 2019 the case was again adjourned as

no witness was present in connection with the instant case. The

Accused/Petitioner states that next date have been fixed on 05th April,

2019 and 06th April, 2019. True and proper appreciation of the orders

passed in connection with the instant case, would clearly indicate that the

Learned Judge while adjourning the case and fixing up long dates on

consecutive occasions at the prayer of the prosecuting agency not only

denied to consider the mala-fide and deprecating conduct of the

prosecution but also literally abdicated his judicial conscience to the

whims and caprice of the prosecuting agency which is unheard off.

A photo copy of the certified copy of the deposition of the PW-1 and

2 as adduced in connection with the instant case on behalf of the

prosecution is annexed hereto and marked with the letter ‘B’.

13. That the Accused/Petitioner states that true and proper

appreciation of the materials on record especially the orders passed by the

Learned Judge in connection with the instant case would make it palpable

that he is languishing in judicial custody in connection with the instant

case for a period of more than 3 years and 7 months and the Learned

Judge at the prayer of prosecuting agency allowing adjournments one after

 10

another occasion and without ensuring presence of witnesses,

unnecessarily fixing long dates without appreciating that the

Accused/Petitioner is subjecting the unfettered whims and caprice of the

prosecuting agency.

14. That the Accused/Petitioner submits that he is completely innocent

and is no way connected with the commission of the alleged offence at all,

as has been alleged against Your Petitioner or otherwise. Instead Your

Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case in order to cause

harassment, insult, ignominy and to wreck vengeance on Your Petitioner,

at the behest of the prosecuting agency.

15. That the Accused/Petitioner states that as far as the allegations

leveled against Your Petitioner is concerned those are totally false,

fictitious, frivolous, concocted, unfounded and has been maliciously

leveled against Your Petitioner.

16. That the Accused/Petitioner states that the text and tenour of

the allegations levelled in the letter of complaint as well as in Charge

Sheet as submitted in connection with the instant case, considered on

the anvil of probability brings out an absurd situation rendering the

accusation devoid of any sense or reason.

 11

17. That the Accused/Petitioner states that he is totally innocent and

has led his life in most decent and dignified manner possible and in

conformity with the status that he has attained by dint of his hard labour

and sincerity. There is no truth in the allegation leveled against Your

Petitioner.

18. That the Accused/Petitioner states that he is a peace loving and law

abiding citizen of India having his permanent residence as indicated in the

cause title and hence have no chance of absconding or tampering with the

prosecution evidence.

19. That the Accused/Petitioner states that further detention of him in

connection with the instant case is not at all necessary, in the facts and

circumstances of the instant case and since the implication/involvement

of the Accused/Petitioner in connection with the instant case is highly

dubious and the investigation of the instant case is already over, there is

no question to interfere with the investigation of the alleged offence.

Besides that there is also no scope for tempering with the prosecuting

witnesses by the Petitioner because most of the witnesses are police

personnel. The Accused/Petitioner further states that he is languishing in

custody in connection with the instant case without any trial for such a

long period which amounts to pre-trial conviction.

20. That notwithstanding his non-involvement in the instant case Your

 12

Petitioner will honestly and earnestly abide by the terms and conditions

that may be imposed upon him by this Hon’ble Court in the event of his

prayer being allowed, will not in any way interfere and/or impede the

course of trial and Your Petitioner further undertakes to co-operate with

the prosecuting agency as and when called upon to do so, in the

event of his prayer being allowed.

21. That this application is made bonafide and for the ends of justice.

In the circumstances it is humbly

prayed that Your Lordships would be

graciously pleased to direct the

release of the Petitioner on bail in

connection with N-143/15 arising

out of Minakhan Police Station Case

No. 270 dated 02.08.2015 under

Sections 20 (b) (ii) (C) of the Narcotic

Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

Act, 1985 on any condition as Your

Lordships may deem fit and proper.

And for this act of kindness, Your Petitioner, as in duty bound, shall ever

pray.

AFFIDAVIT

I, Dinabandhu Mridha, Son of Late Nagendra Mridha, aged about 45 years,

by faith: Hindu, by occupation: Small Trader, residing at Paschim

 13

Dandirhat, Dandirhat (P), Dandirhat, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal, PIN

Code: 743412 do hereby solemnly affirm and say as follows:

1. That I am the Father of the Petitioner of this case, and as such I am

well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the instant case, I

have been duly authorized by the Petitioner and also competent to affirm

this affidavit on behalf of the Petitioner.

2. That the statements made in paragraphs ____________ are true to my

knowledge and in the paragraphs __________________ are information

derived from the records which I verily believed to be true and rests are my

humble submissions before this Hon’ble Court.

Prepared in my office, Deponent is known to me

Clerk to

Advocate Mr.

Advocate

Solemnly affirmed before me

On this day of December, 2018

Commissioner

DISTRICT: 24 PARGANAS NORTH

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANAOUS JURISDICTION
C.R.M.No. of 2019
14

In the matter of:

An application under Section 439 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973;
And
In the matter of:
Sourav Mridha @ Shibu
………………..Accused/Petitioner
(In Judicial Custody)
Versus

The State of West Bengal

…………..…. Opposite Party

APPLICATION FOR BAIL

Mr. Satadru Lahiri

Advocate,
Bar Association Room No.12.
High Court, Calcutta
Calcutta-700001.
Mobile No. 09874193062