High CourtsSingle Bench

Raju S.V.Vs State Of Odisha

Orissa High Court · Decided on 21 December 2023 · Citation: (2023) 12 OHC CK 0136

HON’BLE JUDGES
Savitri Ratho, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 317, 439 · Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 20(b)(ii)(B), 37
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No.12155 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

20 paragraphs · 538 words

Savitri Ratho, J

1.

Heard Mr. B.P. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.

2.

This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner in connection with Excise, District Mobile Unit, Rayagada P.R. Case No. 97 of 2023 corresponding to T.R. No. 50 of 2023 pending in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, Rayagada registered for commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act.

3.

The petitioner had moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Special Judge, Rayagada which was rejected on 16.10.2023.

4.

The prosecution allegation in brief is that when the Inspector of Excise, District Mobile Unit, Rayagada was performing patrolling duty, he spotted the petitioner with a white colour jari sack near Rayagada railway station. After observing the mandatory provisions, the petitioner was searched and 7 kgs. of ganja was recovered from the white colour jari sack. As the petitioner could not produce any license or authority for possessing the same, he was arrested and the ganja was seized.

5.

Mr. B.P. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aged about 19 years and is in custody since 12.10.2023 and he does not have any criminal antecedents. He also submits that the in view of the quantity of ganja seized the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act will not be attracted for consideration of his prayer for bail.

6.

Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating that as the petitioner is a resident of Karnataka, it will be difficult to secure his presence during investigation and during trial and that his criminal antecedents are required to be verified.

7.

Considering the age of the petitioner, the quantity of ganja seized and the submission the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents, I am inclined to allow the prayer for bail.

8.

The petitioner- Raju S.V. shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the learned Court below in seisin over the matter, after the learned Court verifies that the petitioner does not have any antecedents in Odisha and Karnataka, including the following conditions:

(i) He will not indulge in any criminal activity while on bail.

(ii) He will not threaten or try to influence prosecution witnesses while on bail.

(iii) He will cooperate with the investigation.

(iv) He shall furnish cash surety of Rs.5000/-.

(v) He will furnish his mobile number, copy of his Aadhaar Card and permanent address in Karnataka to the Court, and which shall be verified by the I.O./I.I.C. of Rayagada Police Station before he is released on bail.

(vi) He will remain present on each date fixed for trial subject to any order passed by the learned trial Court under Section 317 Crl.P.C.

(vii) He shall not leave District- Rayagada without prior permission of the learned trial Court after the trial starts.

9.

Violation of any condition will entail in cancellation of bail.

10.

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

11.

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

……………………………………