Allowed

Gangi Madkami v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC14 Sept 2021BLAPL/2483/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. regarding an NDPS charge for transportation of ganja, the High Court rejected the prosecution's ground of presumed knowledge based on recovery near the petitioner's seat. Considering her long detention and local residence, the court directed release on bail with standard conditions to appear in court and refrain from further offenses.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with conditions to appear on each posting date and not commit similar offenses; violation leads to cancellation of bail.

Gangi Madkami Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL NO.2483 OF 2020

¶3

Gangi Madkami

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr. N.R. Sahoo, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opposite Party Miss Samapika Mishra, ASC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

MR. JUSTICE D.DASH

ORDER

14.09.2021

Order No.

This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement (virtual/physical) mode.

¶15

This is the successive journey of this Petitioner who is in custody connection with in connection with Orkel P.S. Case No.111(7) of 2018 corresponding to T.R. Case No.125 of 2018 on the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri running for alleged commission of offence under Section-20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act, in filing this application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for her release on bail.

¶16

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that this Petitioner being a widow having been arrested in the case is in custody since 14.10.2018 and the allegation leveled against her is that she was involved in transportation of 104 kgs. of ganja in the vehicle in question found to have been kept in three bags in the dickey and two bags on back seat of the vehicle. He submits that this Petitioner having taken a friendly lift has fallen as a victim

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

after recovery of ganja. It is submitted that despite such long detention of the Petitioner in custody, the trial has not crossed the mid way and the two male persons found in the vehicle at the time of interception having been arrested in the case are also in custody. It is submitted that this Petitioner being a local resident of the district of Malkangiri, there remains no scope on her part to flee from justice and the question of tamper the evidence does not arise as most of the witnesses are officials. In view of all these above, according to him, at this stage, the bar contained under Section-37 of the NDPS Act does not stand on the way of grant of bail; he urges for grant of bail to the Petitioner.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State opposes the move, in view of the quantity of the contraband involved in the case. She further submits that in view of the recovery of the ganja bags from near the very seat where the Petitioner was sitting, her knowledge as to keeping of those bags containing ganja stands presumed and therefore she cannot feign ignorance by saying that she having taken a friendly lift, has been a victim. 5. Taking into account the submissions made; further keeping in view the materials on records as also other surrounding circumstances including the period of detention of the Petitioner in custody and on going through the order passed by the learned Special Judge, in the absence of any such impediment; while being inclined to reconsider the prayer for grant of bail to the Petitioner, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the Court in seisin of the case with further conditions that:-

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

// 3 //

¶23

she will appear in person before the Court in seisin of the case on each date of posting of the case without fail; and

¶24

will not indulge herself in commission of similar type of offence.

¶25

Violation of any of the condition/s shall entail cancellation of bail.

¶26

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶27

Narayan

¶28

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶29

(D. Dash),
Judge.

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Gangi Madkami v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gangi Madkami 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

Birendra Khandapan @ Kandapan Vs State of Odisha

Ghasiram Behera Vs State of Odisha

Abinash Parida Vs State of Odisha

Exe.Engnr.,Grid Co. Vs Jakaka Kambala

Fakira Kritanga Vs State of Odisha

Sk. Rafique Vs State of Odisha