Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Calcutta High Court Refused to Quash Trial Under NDPS Act Against Ex-CPI(M) Leader – Prima Facie Case Made Out.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court, presided over by Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), delivered a verdict affirming the continuation of proceedings in a high-profile narcotics case. The judgment, issued on August 29, 2023, dismisses the petitioner's plea to quash the case and orders the trial to proceed.

The case, CRR 2066 of 2019, revolves around allegations of involvement in storing and transporting contraband under Sections 8(c), 15(c), and 29 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The petitioner, Ashadullah Biswas, sought to quash the proceedings, asserting lack of substantial evidence and arguing that his involvement was based solely on the statements of co-accused individuals.

The Hon’ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) observed, "Prima facie case of the prosecution against the petitioner Ashadullah Biswas is that he stores contraband in his godown and a huge quantity of poppy straw was loaded for transportation from his godown." The court highlighted the principle that confessions of co-accused should be considered along with other evidence and not solely relied upon. The judgment cited relevant legal precedents, including the decision in Sanjay Dutt vs The State of Maharashtra, which underscores the importance of corroborating evidence in such cases.

The court further acknowledged the directions for further investigation and the appointment of a new investigating officer to ensure a thorough probe. This move was aimed at addressing the contradictory statements made by the co-accused and assessing the involvement of the petitioner in the case.

Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) upheld the prima facie case against the petitioner, Ashadullah Biswas, based on the available evidence and the statements of co-accused individuals. The court dismissed the revision and directed the trial to proceed against the petitioner.

This judgment reaffirms the court's commitment to upholding due process and ensuring that cases are determined on the basis of sufficient and credible evidence. The decision serves as a significant precedent in the realm of narcotics cases and the use of co-accused confessions as evidence.

Date of Decision: 29.08.2023

Ashadullah Biswas @ Asadulla Biswas  vs The Union of India & Anr.       

Latest Legal News