Seshadev Kalasi @ Keshab vs State Of Odisha

A.K. Mohapatra, J

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

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Perused the materials placed before this Court.

This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the Petitioner for bail in connection with Tangi Excise P.R.No.191 of 2024 corresponding to T.R.Case No.09 of 2024 pending in the Court of the learned 1st Additional District & Sessions Jude-cum-Special Judge under NDPS Act, Khurda for alleged commission of offence under Section 21(b) of NDPS Act.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is languishing in custody since 07.02.2024. It is also contended by learned counsel for the Petitoner that in the meantime the investigation has been substantially progressed. Further referring to the allegations made in the F.I.R. he has been falsely implicated in this case. Considering the quantity of contraband brown sugar recovered is 30 grams, which is less than commercial quantity, the bar under section 37 of the Act is not attracted to the present case. He also contended that the Petitioner does not have any criminal antecedent. He also contended that since the Petitioner belongs to the locality, there is no chance of his absconding. On such ground learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on any terms and conditions.

Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party, on the other hand, opposed the prayer for release of the Petitioner on bail on the ground that allegations made against the Petitioner is serious in nature. He further submitted that the cases of illegal transportation of contraband article 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 at this juncture.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the respective parties, on careful examination of the materials on record as well as the period of custodial detention of the Petitioner and taking into consideration the seriousness and gravity of the allegation and keeping in view the fact that the bar under section 37 of the Act is not attracted, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the Petitioner and it is directed that let the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter with the following terms and conditions.

I) he shall not indulge in any offence of similar nature while on bail;

II) he shall appear before the trial court on each and every date.

III) he shall appear before the concerned P.S. once in a fortnight preferably on Sunday for a period of three months and thereafter once in a month till conclusion of trial.

IV) he shall appear before the trial court on each and every date fixed.

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

Further, the release of the Petitioner shall also be subject to the verification of similar nature of criminal antecedent of the Petitioner by the learned Court below. In the event, it is found that the Petitioner has any criminal antecedent of similar nature then the bail order shall not be given effect to.

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

....…………………………..