Recently, in the Matter of Md. Mirmoizuddin Rahaman & Anr. v. State, Calcutta High Court has granted Bail to the accused on the ground that Section 41B of CrPC was not complied with and there were discrepancies in the documents of seizure.

The provisions of Section 41B of the Code of Criminal Procedure have to be complied with and there cannot be any discrepancy inherent in the seizure list in order to raise a proper presumption under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, we are of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled to bail.” the division bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Rai Chattopadhyay held.

The Counsel member of the Petitioner has held that there were several crucial discrepancies in the documents of seizure such as Section 41B of the CrPC was not complied with in letter and spirit as no responsible person of the locality was taken as a witness and no independent witness’s signature was taken on seizure list and only signatory on the seizure list was a member of the raiding party.

On the Contrary, the Counsel member of the State argued that the raiding party went along with an investigation kit and the mere fact of the seizure list being a computer printout cannot be held to be suspect.

After observations, the Court held that it is a well-settled legal position that the provisions of Section 41B of the CrPC have to be complied with. Furter, the Court orders the Petitioner not to leave the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court during the entire period of trial and Later, the Court has granted Bail.