Milap Nayak Vs State Of Odisha

Savitri Ratho, J

This application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed in connection with Baliguda P.S. case No. 16 of 2024 corresponding to C.T. Case No. 20 of 2024 pending before the Court of the learned Special Judge -cum- Additional Sessions Judge, Balliguda registered under Section 20(b)(ii)B of NDPS Act.

The prayer for bail of the petitioners have been rejected on 16. 01.2024 passed by learned Special Judge-cum- Additional Sessions Judge, Balliguda, Kandhamal.

Perusal of the impugned order reveals that in the cause title the district to which the petitioners belong, has been mentioned as Bargarh, which is obviously incorrect, as the police station has been mentioned as Balliguda, which comes under Kandhamal District. However, the correct district, i.e. Kandhamal has been mentioned in the cause title of the bail application as well as in the Vnama.

Mr. S. K. Dwibedi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the mean while he has obtained another free copy of the order in which the district has been correctly mentioned as Kandhamal and he shall file the copy of the order in course of the day before the registry.

The said order shall be scanned and incorporated in the digital record.

The prosecution allegation in brief is that 7 kgs 200 gms of ganja was recovered from the possession of the present petitioners, while they were transporting it to Balliguda in a black Pulsar Motorcycle bearing registration No. OD-03Q-0163.

Mr. S. K. Dwibedi, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are in custody since 12.01.2024 and they do not have any criminal antecedents. He further submits that as a major part of the investigation is over and in view of the quantity of ganja seized, Section 37 of the NDPS Act will not be a bar for consideration of their prayer for bail.

Mr. D. K. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate opposes the prayer for bail stating that these type of crimes are increasing every day and as investigation is in progress and the criminal antecedents of the petitioners are requested to be verified, they should not be released on bail.

Considering the quantity of ganja seized and the submission that the petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents, I am inclined to allow the prayer for bail of the petitioners, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents.

The petitioners Milap Nayak and Papa Nayak shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as deemed fit and proper by the learned Court below in seisin over the case, after verifying that they do not have any criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act.

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

…………………………