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
13 paragraphs · 194 wordsB. P. Routray, J
This matter is taken up through video conferencing.
This is an application under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. for bail and the offences alleged are under Secs.29/21(c) of the NDPS Act for alleged possession of
260 grams of brown sugar (heroin).
Heard Mr. L. Mahapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, learned A.S.C. for the State-Opposite Party.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned A.S.C. for the State-Opposite Party, I am not inclined to release the Petitioner
on bail keeping in view the embargo contained under Sec.37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.
The BLAPL is dismissed.
As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a printout of the order
available in the High Court’s website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned advocate, in the manner prescribed vide
Court’s Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020 as modified by Court’s Notice No.4798, dated 15th April, 2021 and Court’s Office
Order circulated vide Memo No.514, dated 7th January, 2022.
............................................