Karna Kanhar vs State Of Odisha

A.K. Mohapatra, J

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

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Perused the materials placed before this Court.

This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the Petitioner for bail in connection with Burla P.S.Case No.188 of 2024 corresponding to T.R.Case No.57 of 2024 pending in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Judge (Special Court), Sambalpur for alleged commission of offence under Section 20(b)(ii)C/29 of the NDPS Act.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is in custody since 10.04.2024. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that in the meantime the investigation has been progressed substantially and Charge Sheet is likely to be filed very soon. Referring to the F.I.R. allegation, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is an auto driver. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the alleged contraband ganja was not recovered from the conscious possession of the Petitioner. It is alleged that the seizure was made from the other three co-accused persons, who are in custody. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner does not have any criminal antecedent. He also contended that since the Petitioner belongs to the locality, there is no chance of his absconding.

Learned Additional Government Advocate for the State on the other hand objected to the release of the Petitioner on bail on the ground that the Petitioner has been implicated in the present case on the allegation that he was illegally transporting contraband ganja which is more than the commercial quantity. He further contended that in the event the Petitioner is released on bail, he may indulge in similar nature of offence. On such ground, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the bail application of the Petitioner deserves no consideration at this juncture.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the respective parties, on careful examination of the materials on record as well as the period of custodial detention of the Petitioner, and taking into consideration the fact that no seizure has been made from the conscious possession of the Petitioner and the Petitioner is having no criminal antecedent, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the Petitioner and it is directed that let the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.35,000/-(Rupees Thirty five thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter. Release of the Petitioner shall also subject to such conditions as would be fixed by the learned court in seisin over the matter.

Further, the release of the Petitioner shall also be subject to the verification of similar nature of criminal antecedent of the Petitioner by the learned Court below. In the event, it is found that the Petitioner has any criminal antecedent of similar nature then the bail order shall not be given effect to.

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

....…………………………..