AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
9 paragraphs · 244 wordsV. Narasingh, J
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner is an accused in connection with Special T.R. Case No.439 of 2023, pending in the Court of the learned District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Bhubaneswar, arising out of Crime Unit P.S. Case No.5 of 2023, for commission of alleged offences under Section 21(c)/29 of NDPS Act read with Section 25/27/35 of Arms Act for possession of 283gms of Brown Sugar.
Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Sessions Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar by order dated 05.09.2023 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.
Taking into account the contraband seized is to the tune of 283 gms, this Court is of the considered view that in terms of the stipulation in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, it would not be prudent to consider the application for bail, during currency of investigation without having the benefit of evaluation of incriminating materials qua the petitioner, post charge sheet by the learned Court in seisin.
The petitioner is at liberty to move the learned Court below after filing of charge sheet. The same shall be considered on its own merits without being influenced by the earlier rejection or the order passed by this Court.
Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.
……………………………