Sesha @ Seshadev Meher vs State Of Orissa

V. Narasingh, J

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The Petitioner is an accused in connection with Spl. G.R. Case No.57 of 2023, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Padampur, arising out of Padampur P.S. Case No. 192 of 2023 for alleged commission of offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of the NDPS 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 Addl. S.J., Padampur, by order dated 04.03.2024 in the aforementioned cases, the present BLAPL has been filed.

This is the second journey of the Petitioner to this Court. Earlier the bail application of the Petitioner was rejected by order dated 02.09.2023 in BLAPL No.9250 of 2023.

The allegation against the Petitioner is that he along with the co-accused were involved in dealing with contraband (Ganja) to the tune of 476 Kgs 280 grams.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the alleged recovery was from a house which admittedly belongs to one Chhota @ Indrajit Meher.

It is stated by the learned counsel that the Petitioner who is a first offender is in custody since 25.07.2023 and referring to the property seizure memo, submits that the column under the persons from whom the contraband was seized left blank.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that from the materials on record, it cannot be said prima facie that Petitioner was in conscious and exclusive possession.

Since in the meanwhile charge sheet has already been filed on 10.01.2024, taking into account the materials on record qua the accusation vis-à-vis the Petitioner, his further continuance in custody is unwarranted. And, more so since he is the first offender.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that on getting specific information the raid was conducted and the presence of the Petitioner at the spot house from which contraband to the tune of 476 Kgs 280 grams was recovered, cannot be accidental and keeping in view the filing of the charge sheet in view of the order of the Apex Court in the case of State by the Inspector of Police vs. B. Ramu in SLP(Crl.) No(s).8137 of 2022 dated 12.02.2024 since prima facie case is well made out, the Petitioner ought not to be released on bail, at this stage. It is his further submission taking into account the background of seizure that there is no infirmity in the property seizure memo.

On a conspectus of materials on record, taking into account the recitals of the FIR, the accusation qua the Petitioner and keeping in view that the Petitioner is the first offender, this Court directs his release on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned court in seisin.

Before releasing, learned Court in seisin is requested to verify the criminal antecedent of the Petitioner. If it comes to the fore that the Petitioner has any criminal antecedent, this order shall not be given effect to.

Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once every month on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin till conclusion of trial. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin.

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per the rules.

....……………………………