SK. Mohammad Mahasin vs State Of Odisha

S.K. Panigrahi, J

This matter is taken up by hybrid mode.

Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

3.The petitioner being in custody in connection with 2 (a) CC Case No.05 of 2020 corresponding to P.R.No.209/19-20 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Cuttack for commission of offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act has filed this application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for his release on bail.

It is alleged in the F.I.R that on 22.02.2020 at 5.30 A.M. while the Inspector of Excise, E.I. and E.B., Unit-II, Cuttack was performing patrolling duty along with his staff under the N.H.16, he found two persons standing at Jagatpur Chhak under N.H.16 with one big blue (light) colour plastic jerry basta. Since their conduct was found suspicious and they were trying to escape from the spot, the police personnel detained them including the petitioner. On searching a gunny bag containing 25 Kgs of contraband 'Ganja' was recovered from their exclusive possession, besides mobile phones, cash etc. Thereafter, all of them including the petitioner were arrested and produced before the Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the investigation of the case has been completed and charge sheet has been submitted. Trial of the case has not yet been commenced. The petitioner has been languishing in custody since 22.02.2020 which is more than one year.

The Petitioner has already spent in custody for about more than one year. The Hon'ble Apex Court, time and again, has expressed displeasure on the delay of trial of the undertrial prisoners and their sufferings due to such delay. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Hussainara Khatoon (I) v. State of Bihar (1980) 1 SCC 81  has observed that "speedy trial is not specifically enumerated as a fundamental right in India; it is implicit in a broad sweep and content of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution". Certain provisions of the Cr.P.C. also impose a statutory obligation upon the courts to proceed the trial "expeditiously" so that the case could be disposed of without inordinate delay. The speedy trial of offences is a desirable goal because long delay can defeat justice. There is a common proverb - 'delay defeats justice'. Hence, it is said that speedy justice is the essence of an organised society and so, cases should be decided as early as possible. The present case fails to confirm to the aforesaid stand as articulated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Learned counsel for the State though vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner but concedes the detention of the petitioner in custody for more than one year without commencement of trial despite charge sheet has already been submitted since long.

Considering the submissions made, facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of detention of the petitioner in custody, it is directed that the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case with some stringent terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the learned court in seisin over the matter with further conditions that:-

i. the petitioner shall appear before the learned trial court on each date of posting of the case;

ii. he shall not indulge himself in any criminal offence while on bail and

iii he shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution evidence in any manner.

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

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

....................................