Rabindra Nath vs State Of Orissa

A.K. Mohapatra, J

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

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party. Perused the materials on record.

The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection with T.R. Case No.176 of 2024, arising out of Excise District Mobile Unit, Khurda P.R. No.245 of 2023-24, pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar, for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. He further submitted that the Petitioner is in custody since 31.03.2024. Further, referring to the allegation made in the F.I.R., learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that five accused persons were arrested and from whose possession a total quantity of 38 Kgs. of contraband Ganja was recovered. He further contended that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contended that the Petitioner belongs to the locality, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. It was further contended that the Petitioner does not have similar criminal antecedent. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on any terms and conditions which he shall abide by while on bail.

Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party, on the other hand, opposed the release of the Petitioner on bail on the ground that allegations made against the Petitioner are serious in nature. He further submitted that the cases of illegal transportation of contraband Ganja are on rise in State of Odisha now-a-days. Therefore, no leniency should be shown to the accused persons who are involved in such type of offence. In such view of the matter, it is submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the materials on record as well as surrounding facts and circumstances of the present case and further taking into consideration the fact that the Petitioner does not have similar criminal antecedent and belongs to the locality, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail on stringent conditions.

Hence, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing 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 Court in seisin over the matter. The release of the Petitioner shall also be subject to the following terms and conditions:-

I. he shall not be involved in similar type of offence while on bail;

II. he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or try to threaten or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever;

III. he shall not make any default in attending the court during trial;

IV. he shall appear before the concerned Police Station once in a month preferably on ‘Sunday’ in between 10.00 A.M. to 1.00 P.M. till conclusion of trial; and

V. he shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court in seisin over the matter.

Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner is subject to the condition that the court below shall verify whether the Petitioner has any criminal antecedent of similar nature. In the event it is found that the Petitioner has any criminal antecedent of similar nature, then this bail order shall automatically stand revoked.

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of..

.…………………………….