Padman Muduli vs State Of Orissa

G. Satapathy, J

This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Malkangiri PS Case No.529 of 2023 corresponding to Special GR Case No.204 of 2023 pending in the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.20(b)(ii)(C)/25/29 of NDPS Act.

The gist of facts as found from the record is that on 30.09.2023 at about 4.45 AM while performing patrolling duty, the police staff stopped two bolero vehicles coming from Malkangiri on suspicion. The first Bolero bearing Registration No.OD-24-7169 was stopped in which one M. Mohan Rao and CICL were sitting. The second Bolero bearing Registration No.OD- 02-AL-9817 was also stopped at some distance and three persons sitting therein escaped, but during search, 600Kgs of Contraband Ganja were seized from the aforesaid two vehicles. The second Bolero was being allegedly driven by M. Arjun Rao @ China (brother of accused M. Mohan Rao) with co-passenger Ganesh. During interrogation, M. Mohan Rao stated that the ganja had been supplied by Padman Muduli, who was allegedly escorting the ganja in another Bolero bearing Registration No.OR-05-AM-4772 along with co-accused person. During investigation, it was found that the petitioner-Padman Muduli has one criminal antecedent in Chitrakonda PS Case No.57 of 2023 for commission of offence punishable U/S.20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act.

In the course of hearing, Mr. Rajib Lochan Pattnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no nexus in the transportation of Contraband article and he is a local boy and he having no criminal antecedent and detained in custody since 10.01.2023, may kindly be granted bail.

3.1. On the other hand, Mr. S.C. Pradhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that since the petitioner was allegedly found in transporting 600Kgs of Contraband Ganja, which is well above the commercial quantity and he having not satisfied the conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act, the bail application of the petitioner may kindly be rejected.

After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against the petitioner for transporting 600Kgs of Contraband Ganja, which is well above the commercial quantity in two Bolero vehicles, but the present petitioner was not apprehended from the spot. The criminal antecedent of the petitioner has not been stated in his bail application and it was submitted that the petitioner is not having any criminal antecedent, however, the petitioner-Padman Muduli is found to be allegedly involved in Chitrakonda PS Case No.57 of 2023 for commission of offence punishable U/S.20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, which is a material suppression. In this regard, this Court considers it profitable to refer to the decision of the Apex Court in Munnesh Vrs. State of Uttar Pradesh; 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1319, wherein the Apex Court in paragraph-9 has held that "since the petitioner has suppressed material facts with regard to his involvement in criminal cases, he is not entitled to the discretionary relief of bail".

In addition, the petitioner herein is allegedly found for commission of offence punishable U/S.20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act involving commercial quantity and he is, thereby, required to satisfy the conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act, but on a conspectus of the materials placed on record together with the criminal antecedent as reported against the petitioner, this Court hardly finds the petitioner to have satisfied the conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstance and the suppression of criminal antecedent by the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the learned Court in seisin over the matter.