Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Md. Arif & Anr vs Unknown on 10 December, 2025
Author: Arijit Banerjee
Bench: Arijit Banerjee
10.12.2025
Item no. 51.
Court No.8.
AB
(Allowed)
CRA (DB) 199 of 2025
With
CRAN 1 of 2025
In the matter of : Md. Arif & Anr.
......Petitioners/
Appellants.
Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, Sr. Adv,
Mr. Nirupam Dhali,
Ms. Priya Chakraborty ......for the Appellants/
Petitioners.
Mr. Krishnendu Bhattacharya,
Mr. Priyankar Ganguly ......for the Union of India.
Ms. Manasi Mukherjee,
Mr. Bijitesh Mukherjee ......for the Custom Authority.
Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J.
In re : CRAN 1 of 2025
1. The petitioners were convicted under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years apart from being fined in the sum of Rs.1 Lac, by a judgment and order dated March 18, 2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, 1st Court, Raiganj, Uttar Dinajpur, in Special NDPS Case No.69 of 2021. The petitioners now pray for suspension of sentence pending disposal of the appeal.
2. The petitioners say that they have already been in custody for about four years three months since September 7, 2021. There is no possibility of an early hearing of this appeal of 2025.
2
3. Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners relies on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of 2025 SCC Online SC 366 (Narcotic Control Bureau Vs Lakhwinder Singh), 2025 SCC Online SC 2327 (Suresh Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan) and submits that in a case of term imprisonment, a rigid approach should not be taken. In any event, Article 21 of the Constitution of India will prevail over Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
4. Learned Advocates for the Customs and Union of India strongly oppose the prayer for bail. They say that three independent witnesses have deposed against the petitioners. 2000 bottles of phensedyl syrup were seized from the petitioners. No leniency should be shown to them.
5. It is not in dispute that the petitioners are in custody for about four years three months. The term imprisonment is for ten years. We notice the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Narcotic Control Bureau Vs Lakhwinder Singh.
"6. In the case of fixed term sentences, if the Courts start adopting a rigid approach, in a large number of cases, till the appeal reaches the stage of the final hearing, the accused would undergo the entire sentence. This will be a violation of the rights of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution. Moreover, it will defeat the right of appeal."
6. We also see that in the case of Suresh Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court granted bail to the petitioner who had prayed for suspension of 3 sentence and had been in custody for about two years five months. There the petitioner had been sentenced for ten years. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, referring to its earlier decision in Kashmira Singh Vs State of Punjab reported in (1977) 4 SCC 291, granted bail to the petitioner.
7. In view of the aforesaid, without touching the merits of the case and purely on the ground of long detention of the petitioners coupled with the improbability of an early hearing of the appeal, we allow this application and suspend the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the applicants/appellants.
8. Accordingly, we direct that the applicants/appellants, namely Md. Arif and Rakesh Restogi shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000/-each, with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Uttar Dinajpur at Raiganj, and on further conditions that they shall meet the Inspector in charge/Officer in charge, Raiganj Police Station once in a week till disposal of the appeal and shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of Raiganj Police Station without the leave of the Inspector in charge/Officer in charge, Raiganj Police Station except for the purpose of attending Court proceeding until further order. The applicants shall be personally present or shall be represented by their Counsel during hearing of the appeal and they shall surrender before 4 the Trial Court as and when called for in connection with the present appeal.
9. The department is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Superintendent of the concerned Correctional Home for immediate release of the applicants/appellants unless they are wanted in connection with any other case.
10. We clarify that the observations made by us in this order are only for the purpose of disposing of the application for suspension of sentence and the same shall have no relevance at the final hearing of the appeal.
11. The application being CRAN 1 of 2025 is accordingly disposed of.
In re : CRA (DB) 199 of 2025
12. Let the appeal be listed on 17.12.2025 under the heading "To Be Mentioned". The department shall file a report as regards the status of the appeal and in particular, whether or not paper book has been prepared.
13. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Arijit Banerjee, J.) (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.) 5