STATE OF TRIPURA Vs. MIJANUR RAHAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Raju Datta, learned PP appearing for the applicant-State. Also heard Mr. S. Ali, learned counsel for the respondent-accused.

(2.) This is an application filed under Sec. 439(2) read with Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. by the applicant-State for cancellation of bail granted to the respondent-accused by the learned Special Judge, Sepahijala District, Sonamura vide Order dtd. 30/1/2024 in case no. Special (NDPS) 97 of 2023 arising out of Sonamura PS Case No. 118 of 2023 registered under Ss. 20(b)(ii)(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act.

(3.) Mr. Ali, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-accused person has vehemently opposed the petition filed by the applicant-State for cancellation of bail of the respondent-accused. The main argument advanced by learned counsel for the respondent-accused is that the police authorities have mechanically registered the case with an ulterior motive against the respondent-accused. Mr. Ali, learned counsel has pointed out some discrepancies in mentioning the dates of recording the GD entries where GDE No. 19 was registered on 18/8/2023, but, GDE No. 21 has been recorded on 8/7/2023. The second fold of submission of Mr. Ali, learned counsel for the respondent-accused is that Sec. 37 of the NDPS Act nowhere suggests that after filing of charge-sheet the accused can be kept in custody, which the learned Special Judge, Sepahijala District, Sonamura has rightly held.