Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
)/23/29 Of The Ndps Act vs In Re : Rajat Bhaskar Nayak on 19 April, 2023
19.04.2023 6&7 sdas rejected C.R.M. (NDPS) No. 724 of 2023 In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with NCB Crime No. 66/NCB/KOL/2021 under Sections 8(c)/20(b)(ii)(A)/22(c )/23/29 of the NDPS Act.
And In Re : Rajat Bhaskar Nayak ..... petitioner With C.R.M. (NDPS) No. 658 of 2023 In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with NCB/KZU/Crime No. 66 of 2021 dated 31.07.2021 under Sections 8(c)/20(b)(ii)(A)/22(c )/23/29 of the NDPS Act.
And In Re : Prabhakar Choudhary ..... petitioner Mr. Sabyasachi Banerjee Mr. Apalak Basu Mr. Nazir Ahmed ... for the petitioner in C.R.M. (NDPS) No. 724 of 2023 Mr. Anirban Chakraborty ... for the petitioner in C.R.M. (NDPS) No. 658 of 2023 Mr. Rajdeep Majumder Mr. Uttam Basak ... for the NCB in C.R.M. (NDPS) No. 724 of 2023 Mr. Dipankar Dandapath Mr. Pralay Bhattacharya ... for the NCB in C.R.M. (NDPS) No. 658 of 2023 2 In Re : CRM (NDPS) No. 724 of 2023 Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits no narcotics was recovered from his possession. His complicity has transpired from the statements of the petitioner and co-accused recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act which are inadmissible in law. It is further contended no investigation with regard to the source of the seized consignment i.e. 2475 LSD bots was undertaken. Investigation is complete. Materials collected during investigation do not establish a nexus between the petitioner and transactions in narcotics. Accordingly he prays for bail.
Learned Counsel for the NCB opposes the prayer for bail and submits a conspiracy was hatched amongst the accused persons to import narcotics from abroad through dark web. A consignment of Ganja from Canada was seized. On interrogation of co-accused Kanhaiya Kumar Sinha complicity of Dhiraj Kumar transpired. A consignment bearing the name of the petitioner as the consignee containing 2475 LSD bots was recovered. Statements of the petitioner and co-accused corroborate the aforesaid transaction. Petitioner had booked the consignment through a self-destructing application in the dark web. Password of the said application was revealed from the statement of the petitioner.
We have considered the materials on record. Case involves importation of narcotics from abroad through dark web. 3 Though it is strenuously contended no narcotics was recovered from the petitioner and his complicity has transpired from the statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act alone, materials placed before us show a consignment recovered from co-accused Dhiraj Kumar being 2475 LSD bots above commercial quantity was booked in the name of the petitioner. These materials are corroborated by the statements recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. It cannot be said that the prosecution case is solely founded on the said statements alone. Other materials on record including revelation of password to the self-destructing application from the statement of the petitioner also establish his nexus.
In view of the aforesaid incriminating materials showing complicity of the petitioner in the crime and the statutory restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
The application for bail is, thus, rejected.
In Re : CRM (NDPS) No. 658 of 2023 Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits no narcotics was recovered. He has been falsely implicated. He prays for bail.
Learned Counsel for the NCB opposes the prayer for bail and submits a conspiracy hatched between accused persons to import narcotics from abroad was revealed during investigation. Petitioner is one of the conduits through which narcotics was 4 distributed to peddlers. His complicity transpired from the statement of Kanhaiya Kumar Sinha. Petitioner made statement under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. This resulted in disclosure of identity of Dhiraj Kumar and led to recovery of 2500 LSD bots.
The aforesaid circumstances including CDRs and other materials showing active involvement of the petitioner with co- accused Dhiraj Kumar and others in the crime. Investigation is in progress. Hence, we are of the opinion this is not a fit case to grant bail to the petitioner.
The application for bail is, thus, rejected. Personal appearance of the investigating officer is noted and dispensed with.
(Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)