Allowed

Mikunda Kanhar v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC14 Oct 2020BLAPL/9107/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to two petitioners charged with drug transportation under the N.D.P.S. Act. The court allowed the application despite a criminal antecedent of one petitioner, considering the lengthy custody and lack of evidence showing likelihood of re-offending or witness tampering.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail on conditions imposed by the trial court and specific undertakings against re-offending and witness intimidation.

Mikunda Kanhar Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

BLAPL No.9107 of 2019

¶2

07. 14.10.2020

¶3

This matter is taken up through Video Conferencing due to Lockdown in the wake of Pandemic COVID-19.

¶4

This is an application under Section 439, Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioners in connection with K. Nuagaon P.S. Case No.56 of 2019 corresponding to C.T. Case No.103 of 2019 pending in the court of the learned Special Judge-cum-Additional District & Sessions Judge, Balliguda for alleged commission of offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 is a driver and he has no knowledge about transporting of the ganja and petitioner no.2 is the passenger. He further submits that the petitioners are languishing in jail custody since 01.10.2019. There is no criminal antecedent against the petitioners and chargesheet has already been submitted.

¶6

Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating that the mandatory provisions have been complied with and seized article is more than the commercial quantity. Learned State Counsel, however, has fairly submitted on instructions that there is a criminal antecedent against the petitioners.

¶7

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the materials available on record and the period of detention in custody coupled with the fact that no criminal antecedent is shown, I am satisfied

¶8

¶9

that the petitioners will not likely to commit any offence after their release on bail. Therefore, I am inclined to allow the bail application and direct that the petitioners be released on bail in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as would be deemed fit and proper by the learned trial court in addition to the following conditions :

¶10

(i) they shall not commit similar offence or any other offence;

¶11

(ii) they shall not directly or indirectly terrorize or threaten or try to influence the prosecution witnesses;

¶12

(iii) they shall not indulge in any sort of criminal activities while on bail; and

¶13

(iv) they shall appear before the court on each date of the trial unless prevented by reasonable causes.

¶14

Violation of any of the above conditions would entail cancellation of bail of the petitioners.

¶15

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶16

P. Patnaik, J.

¶17

G/D

Mikunda Kanhar v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mikunda Kanhar v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Susanta Kumar Das Vs State of Odisha

Shesadev Padhan Vs State of Odisha

Ananta Kumar Patra Vs State of Odisha

Tuna Dakua Vs State of Odisha

Bikash Chandra Panda Vs State of Odisha

Bhimasena Hati Vs State of Odisha