Amarnath Bisi vs State Of Orissa

A.K. Mohapatra, J

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party. Perused the materials on record.

The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection with S.A. Case No.14 of 2024, arising out of Komna P.S. Case No.81 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Nuapada, for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 21(b)/27(b)(ii) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. He further submitted that the Petitioner is in custody since 23.03.2024. He further contended that the investigation must have progressed substantially in the meantime. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that as per F.I.R. allegation, a total quantity of 140 sealed bottles of Escuf Syrup were recovered from the possession of the Petitioner and another co-accused person when they were transporting the same by means of a motorcycle. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contended that since the quantity of contraband article seized is less than the commercial quantity, the bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act would not be attracted to the facts of the present case. He further contended that the Petitioner belongs to the locality, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. It is also contended that the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedent. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on any terms and conditions which he shall abide by while on bail.

Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party, on the other hand, opposed the release of the Petitioner on bail on the ground that allegations made against the Petitioner are serious in nature. In such view of the matter, it is submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected.

Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the materials on record as well as the seriousness and gravity of the allegation and further keeping in view the period of custodial detention and the fact that the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedent, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail.

Hence, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees thirty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter. The release of the Petitioner shall also be subject to such other terms and conditions as would be fixed by the Court in seisin over the matter. Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner is subject to the condition that the court below shall verify whether the Petitioner is having any criminal antecedent of similar nature. In the event it is found that the Petitioner has criminal antecedent of similar nature, then this bail order shall automatically stand revoked.

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

.…………………………….