High CourtsSingle Bench

Vinod Kumar vs State Of Odisha

Orissa High Court · Decided on 8 April 2024 · Citation: (2024) 04 OHC CK 0055

HON’BLE JUDGES
G. Satapathy, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 20(b)(ii)(C), 37
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 1016 Of 2024
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

11 paragraphs · 395 words

G. Satapathy, J

1.

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

2.

This is a bail application U/S.439 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Gosaninuagaon P.S. Case No. 182 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.48 of 2023(N) pending in the file of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Ganjam, Berhampur for commission of offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, on the allegation of possessing 83Kgs and 910 Grams of Contraband Ganja along with co-accused persons.

3.

Heard Mr.L.Sarangi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.G.N.Rout, learned ASC in the matter and perused the record.

4.

Mr.L.Sarangi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner has been shown to have been arrested from the house, but practically, he was arrested from the Railway Station and neither he was possessing Contraband Ganja nor was he found with any Contraband substance nor any cash was recovered from his possession to establish allegation against him to be present there for purchasing Contraband article and therefore, the petitioner may kindly be granted bail.

5.

On the other hand, Mr.G.N.Rout, learned ASC submits that since the petitioner was found inside the room in which 83Kgs and 910 Grams of Contraband Ganja was recovered which is coming under commercial quantity, he is required to satisfy the Court the conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act, but the petitioner having not satisfied such conditions is not entitled to get bail. Accordingly, Mr.Rout prays to reject the bail application of the petitioner.

6.

After having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of offences alleged against the petitioner, as also the accusations sought to be brought against him and on going through the materials placed on record which discloses allegation against the petitioner to be found along with commercial quantity of 83Kgs and 910 Grams of Contraband Ganja with two other accused persons in the house and the failure of the petitioner to satisfy the Court the conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act and taking into account the other circumstance on record in entirety, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected.

7.

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

8.

Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.

………………………..