SAPIKUL ISLAM PRITAM ROY vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL — CRM(NDPS)/643/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Uncontested--REJECTED on 25th March 2026.
CNR: WBCHCJ0063332025
Next Hearing
22nd December 2025
Filing Number
CRM(NDPS) /636/2025
Filing Date
18-12-2025
Registration No
CRM(NDPS) /643/2025
Registration Date
18-12-2025
Judge
HON'BLE JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK
Coram
HON'BLE JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
GROUP C (CRIMINAL MATTERS) ( 3 )
Sub-Category
Bail/Cancellation of bail ( 11 )
Judicial Branch
CRIMINAL SECTION
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--REJECTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SAPIKUL ISLAM PRITAM ROY
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK
APPLICATION FOR BAIL
APPLICATION FOR BAIL
APPLICATION FOR BAIL
APPLICATION FOR BAIL
APPLICATION FOR BAIL
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 22-12-2025 | APPLICATION FOR BAIL | |
| 25-03-2026 | APPLICATION FOR BAIL | |
| 19-02-2026 | APPLICATION FOR BAIL | |
| 18-02-2026 | APPLICATION FOR BAIL | |
| 17-02-2026 | APPLICATION FOR BAIL |
Orders
Summary: The Calcutta High Court Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri rejected Sapikul Islam's post-arrest bail application in a narcotic drugs case involving seizure of commercial quantity of brown sugar. The court held that the petitioner failed to overcome the stringent restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985, and found that procedural deficiencies in the search and seizure process were not fatal to the prosecution's case, reserving such issues for trial consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Calcutta High Court Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri rejected Sapikul Islam's post-arrest bail application in a narcotic drugs case involving seizure of commercial quantity of brown sugar. The court held that the petitioner failed to overcome the stringent restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985, and found that procedural deficiencies in the search and seizure process were not fatal to the prosecution's case, reserving such issues for trial consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts