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
13 paragraphs · 372 wordsV. Narasingh, J
Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The Petitioner is an accused in Special G.R. Case No.121 of 2022 pending on the file of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri, arising out of Kalimela P.S. Case No.131 of 2022 for commission of the offence under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/27-a/29 of the N.D.P.S Act.
Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. Case is pending in any other Court.
Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s. 439 Cr.P.C by the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri, by order dated 01.11.2022 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.
It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner is in custody since 8.5.2022 on the allegation that the Petitioner along with co-accused are involved in transportation of contraband (ganja) to the tune of 483 Kg. 200 grams.
It is further submitted that since charge sheet has already been filed, further continuance of the Petitioner in custody is not warranted.
It is the further submission that since the contraband was found from a car and the Petitioner was not admittedly present in the car at the time of seizure, conscious and exclusive possession of the contraband cannot be attributed to the Petitioner. Hence, it is submitted that the rigors of Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the N.D.P.S Act is not attracted in the case at hand.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that the contemporaneous apprehension of the Petitioner lends credence to the case of the prosecution and hence at this stage the submission that the Petitioner was not in conscious and exclusive possession of the contraband is to be negated.
On a conspectus of the materials on record and considering that the Petitioner is a flight risk and keeping in view the rigors of Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the N.D.P.S Act, this Court is not inclined to entertain this bail application at this stage.
Accordingly, BLAPL stands rejected.
Learned Court in seisin is requested to expedite the trial in tune with the report of the learned Special Judge.
.………………………………..