The learned counsel appearing for the State
would vehemently submit that Babu Chatterjee
obtained bail by making false statement before the
Court that almost 25 witnesses are to be examined
whereas only 13 witnesses are to be examined. {Para 4}
5. If it is the case of the State that Babu
Chatterjee, the co-accused obtained bail by
suppressing the true facts before the High Court,
then the High Court should have considered the
application preferred by the State for
cancellation of bail of Babu Chatterjee.
6. We fail to understand why the High Court says
that a coordinate Bench cannot cancel the bail
granted to an co-accused. If the bail has been
obtained by placing wrong facts before the High
Court, the Court can always look into the matter
and pass an appropriate order.
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No(s).9148-9149/2026
SURAJ MAHANANDA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
Date : 27-05-2026
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made
the following O R D E R
1. The petitioner has been denied regular bail
by the High Court in connection with the First
Information Report No.477/2024 registered with
Sankrail Police Station, Sub-Division Howrah,
District Howrah for the offence punishable under
Sections 21(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “the
NDPS Act”) respectively.
2. We heard Mr. Sukesh Ghosh, the learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Parag
Chaturvedi, the learned counsel appearing for the
State.
3. We take notice of the fact that the
petitioner is in judicial custody as an undertrial
prisoner past 1 year and 10 months. We also
take notice of the fact that till this date, only
01 witness has been examined. More importantly,
the co-accused Babu Chatterjee @ Dipendera Narayan
Chatterjee, similarly situated like the present
petitioner is on bail.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the State
would vehemently submit that Babu Chatterjee
obtained bail by making false statement before the
Court that almost 25 witnesses are to be examined
whereas only 13 witnesses are to be examined.
5. If it is the case of the State that Babu
Chatterjee, the co-accused obtained bail by
suppressing the true facts before the High Court,
then the High Court should have considered the
application preferred by the State for
cancellation of bail of Babu Chatterjee.
6. We fail to understand why the High Court says
that a coordinate Bench cannot cancel the bail
granted to an co-accused. If the bail has been
obtained by placing wrong facts before the High
Court, the Court can always look into the matter
and pass an appropriate order.
7. Be that as it may, today, the fact is that
Babu Chatterjee @ Dipendra Narayan Chatterjee is
very much on bail.
8. In view of the aforesaid, we order that the
petitioner be released on bail forthwith, if not
required in any other case, subject to terms and
conditions that the Trial Court may deem fit to
impose. Trial shall proceed further expeditiously.
10. With the aforesaid, the Special Leave
Petitions stand disposed of.
11. Pending application(s), if any, shall also
stand disposed of.
