Lingaraj Sabar vs State Of Orissa

G. Satapathy, J

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

This is a bail application U/S.439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in connection with G.R. Case No.48 of 2021 (N) arising out of Pattapur P.S. Case No.331 of 2021 pending in the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-Special Judge, L.R. & LTV, Berhampur, Dist-Ganjam for commission of offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act, on the allegation of possessing 386Kgs 400Grams of Contraband Ganja along with co-accused persons.

In the course of hearing of the bail application, Mr. S.K. Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although there is allegation of seizure of 386Kgs 400Grams of Contraband Ganja in this case, but the fact remains that around 64Kgs 700Grams of Contraband Ganja was alleged to have been seized from the house of the petitioner, which was being not in exclusive occupation of the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner may kindly be granted bail. It is further submitted by him that basing on the statements of the R.I., Amin and Tahasildar, the present petitioner’s exclusive possession of Contraband Ganja from his house has been found, but the same was without any basis.

On the other hand, Mrs. S.R. Sahoo, learned ASC, however, strongly opposes the bail application of the petitioner by resorting to Section 37 of NDPS Act.

After having considered the rival submissions made and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of accusation raised against the petitioner and keeping in view the recovery and seizure of such a huge quantity of Contraband Ganja and the failure of the petitioner to satisfy the twin conditions as mandated under Section 37 of NDPS Act and taking into account the law laid down by the Apex Court in State of Kerala & others Vrs. Rajesh and Others; (2020)12 SCC 122, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. However, taking into consideration the period of custody, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail, if the trial is not concluded within six months of receipt of copy of this order by the learned trial Court. It is, however, clarified, the learned Sessions Judge shall herself take up or assign to any other competent Court for expeditious trial of the case by obtaining necessary permission, since the post of Presiding Officer of the learned trial Court is lying vacant as per the submission made at the Bar.

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial Court forthwith.

Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per  Rules.

……………………………