Prem Majhi vs State Of Odisha

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. by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Adava P.S. Case No. 113 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.68 of 2023 pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Gajapati, Paralakhemundi for commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, on the allegation of possessing 556 Kgs and 800 Grams of Contraband Ganja.

Mr. J. Sahoo, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that although the Petitioner, who is not named in the FIR, was arrested and forwarded to the Court two months after recovery of the Contraband Ganja and moreover, the person who was stated to be present with the Contraband Ganja namely Tarzan Nayak has not been charge-sheeted by the Police, whereas two innocent persons which includes the petitioner were charge-sheeted in this case on the basis of their confession which is in admissible in the eye of law and, therefore, the Petitioner may kindly be granted bail.

On the other hand, Mrs. S.Pattanaik, learned AGA, however, strongly opposes the bail application of the Petitioner by inter-alia submitting that the IO-cum-Informant on her confidential enquiry has found sufficient materials to proceed against the Petitioner and thereby, she has arrested and forwarded the Petitioner to the Court and the quantity of contraband Ganja seized in this case being coming under commercial quantity, Sec. 37 of NDPS Act would stand against the release of the Petitioner on bail. On being asked, Mrs. Pattanaik clarifies that no criminal antecedent is available against the petitioner.

It appears from the record that initially FIR was only recorded against Tarzan Nayak and others, for recovery of aforesaid quantity of Contraband Ganja kept inside the jungle between village Rumesh and Tikilima on 14.07.2023, but neither Tarzan Nayak was apprehended from the spot nor was he being charge sheeted for committing the aforesaid offences and the present petitioner and one co-accused were arrested near about two months after the recovery of the aforesaid Contraband Ganja. It is found from the charge sheet that the Petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of his confession which persuades this Court to record satisfaction about the conditions of Sec. 37 of NDPS Act by the petitioner in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Tofan Singh Vrs. State of Tamil Nadu; (2020) 80 OCR (SC) 641, especially when no criminal antecedent of the petitioner being brought to the notice of the Court by the State.

In view of the above facts and taking into consideration the rival submissions and on going through the materials placed on record including the statements of the witnesses and the FIR which was not lodged against the Petitioner and regard being had to the mode and manner of implication of the petitioner only on his confession and release of co-accused namely Andriya Majhi on bail in BLAPL No. 11912 of 2023, this Court admits the Petitioner to bail.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) only with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it with following conditions:-

(i) the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail,

(ii) the petitioner in the course of trial shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless his attendance is dispensed with. In case the Petitioner fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioner for offence U/S.229-A of IPC in accordance with law,

(iii) the petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case by intimating his present address of stay,

(iv) the petitioner shall report attendance before the Jurisdictional Police Station once in a week preferably on Sunday in between 10 A.M. to 12 Noon for six (06) months from the actual date of release from the custody.

The I.I.C. of Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the petitioner unnecessarily after recording his attendance beyond the time as stipulated.

It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the petitioner in future any offence under NDPS Act on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case.

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.

..…………………………..