CHAMINA KHATUN SANDIPAN DAS vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL — CRM(NDPS)/273/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 10th June 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 19-May-2026

CNR: WBCHCJ0019662026

Filing Number

CRM(NDPS)/280/2026

Filing Date

15-May-2026

Registration No

CRM(NDPS)/273/2026

Registration Date

18-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

Coram

Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP C (CRIMINAL MATTERS) ( 3 )

Sub-Category

Bail/Cancellation of bail ( 11 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL SECTION

Decision Date

10-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CHAMINA KHATUN SANDIPAN DAS

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim BhattacharyaView PDF

    The High Court at Calcutta rejected Chamina Khatun's bail application in an NDPS case involving seizure of 508 grams of brown sugar from her father-in-law's house. Although the petitioner argued nothing was directly recovered from her and the house belonged to her relative, the court found the quantity of contraband substantial and the FIR established her possession, making bail unsuitable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Jun-2026

    Application For Bail - 1

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  4. 09-Jun-2026

    Application For Bail - 1

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  5. 19-May-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 15-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM(NDPS)/273/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court at Calcutta rejected Chamina Khatun's bail application in an NDPS case involving seizure of 508 grams of brown sugar from her father-in-law's house. Although the petitioner argued nothing was directly recovered from her and the house belonged to her relative, the court found the quantity of contraband substantial and the FIR established her possession, making bail unsuitable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case