Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Rashmoni @ Rubi Biswas vs The State Of West Bengal on 6 November, 2013
Author: Jayanta Kumar Biswas
Bench: Jayanta Kumar Biswas
1 In The High Court At Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dr. Mrinal Kanti Chaudhuri CRM No.13611 of 2013 Rashmoni @ Rubi Biswas v.
The State of West Bengal Mr. Atis Kumar Biswas ...for the petitioner.
Heard on: November 6, 2013 Order on: November 6, 2013.
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J:- The petitioner's bail prayer was rejected by this court on July 9, 2013 in CRM No.9624 of 2013. The order is quoted below:-
"The petitioner accused of offences under ss.20(b)/29/30 of NDPS Act and in custody from April 4, 2013 is seeking bail under s.439 CrPC.
We have heard advocates for the petitioner and the State and have perused the case diary produced before us. Advocate for the petitioner has submitted that only 1.5 kg ganja was recovered from the petitioner's possession. Advocate for the State has said that from the joint possession of the six charge-sheeted accused 7.5 kg ganja was recovered, and that the accused were possessing it with a view to trafficking in it. In our opinion, bail to the petitioner will affect the general interest of the society and trial of the case.
For these reasons, we dismiss the CRM. Certified xerox."
Advocate for the petitioner has submitted as follows. On the last day for which the trial of the case was fixed, the prosecution did not examine any witness. The petitioner has no one to look after his family in his absence. Hence it is in the interest of justice that the petitioner should be granted bail.
In our opinion, this is not a case for bail. The bail prayer was rejected on July 9, 2013 after submission of charge-sheet. 7.5 kg ganja was recovered 2 from the six accused. The prosecution case is that the accused were possessing the ganja with a view to trafficking in it. In our opinion, this is a case for the petitioner's custodial trial.
For these reasons, we dismiss the CRM. We, however, order that the court below shall take all possible steps for expeditious conclusion of trial of the case, and that prosecution shall not take any adjournment, unless it is essentially required. Certified xerox.
(Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.)
S.R. (Dr. Mrinal Kanti Chaudhuri, J.)