Dusmanta Guru vs State Of Odisha

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 placed before this Court.

The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection with 2 (a) CC. Case No.11 of 2024, arising out of Excise Station Binka P.R Case No. 229 of 2023-24, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, Sonepur for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is in custody since 26.02.2024. Further contended that in the meantime the investigation has progressed substantially. Further, referring to the allegations made in the F.I.R., the learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Further it is contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner was a passenger in the vehicle in which the contraband article was being transported. Further it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that no recovery was made from the exclusive and conscious possession of the Petitioner. Further he contended that the Petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the vehicle. He further submitted that the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the Petitioner belongs to the locality and there is no chance of his absconding. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on any terms and condition which the Petitioner undertakes to 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 in the event the Petitioner is released on bail, there is a possibility that he might be involved in similar criminal offences. Learned Additional Standing Counsel submitted that nature of allegation and the contraband article used in the present case is itself a threat to the society. Therefore, he submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected at this juncture. Further he contended that the investigation is still on-going.

Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the surrounding facts and circumstances of the present case and further keeping the view the fact that the Petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail subject to imposition of stringent conditions.

Hence, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.40,000/-(Rupees Forty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter.

It is open for the Court in seisin over the matter to impose any other conditions as may be deemed just and proper. Violation of any other conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail application.

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner be subject to the condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the Petitioner. In the event the Petitioner is having any similar criminal antecedent under the offences of NDPS Act, this bail order shall automatically stand revoked.

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

……………………………