High Court rejected bail application citing Section 37 N.D.P.S. Act bar due to commercial quantity of seized ganja, but directed trial court to expedite and conclude trial within six months.
Expedite trial and conclude within six months; bail denied.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BLAPL No. 7988 of 2018
This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with T.R. Case No. 59 of 2018 arising out of Chitrakonda P.S. No.56 of 2018 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, Malkangiri for offence punishable under section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act.
The petitioner moved an application for bail before the learned Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, Malkangiri which was rejected on 19.06.2018.
Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the State that commercial quantity of the ganja was seized from the possession of the petitioner and in view of the bar under section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, the BLAPL stands dismissed.
However, taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody since 16.05.2018, I direct the learned trial Court to expedite the trial and if possible, to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order of this Court.
Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial Court.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
S. K. Sahoo, J.
…………………..
2
skb
3
P
4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be released on bail in a commercial quantity drug case under the N.D.P.S. Act despite Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Whether the trial court should expedite the trial considering the period of judicial custody.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
State
S. K. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
