Allowed

Biswanath Parmanik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC12 Aug 2021BLAPL/3650/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under section 439 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Orissa granted bail to the petitioner convicted under the NDPS Act. The court accepted arguments that the recovered quantity was not a commercial quantity and noted the petitioner's strong local ties and low flight risk.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail on terms and conditions to be framed by the court in seisin of the case.

Biswanath Parmanik Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.3650 of 2021

¶3

Biswanath Paramanik

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr.A.Tripathy, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opposite Party Mr.K.K.Nayak, ASC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

MR. JUSTICE D.DASH

ORDER

12.08.2021

Order No.

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

¶15

The Petitioner being in custody in connection with P.R. Case No.55 of 2020 corresponding to 2(a) CC Case No.20 of 2020 on the file of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Cuttack running for commission of offence under sections 20(b)(ii)(c), has filed this application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for his release on bail.

¶16

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that with the on the allegation that this Petitioner was in possession of around 82 kgs of ganja, he being arrested in the case is in custody since 28.9.2020. It is submitted that although it is said that each of the four persons were found carrying one bag containing 20 kgs and 500 grams of ganja, the entire quantity of ganja has been taken have been recovered from each of the Petitioner. He further submits that under the circumstance the

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

weighment as has been made, marginal error and accordingly, the quantity said to have been carried by each may not stands as commercial quantity. He thus submits that here in the case, the bar under section 37 of the Act does not stand on the way of grant of bail to the Petitioner is not ruled out. It is submitted that the investigation of the case by now has made substantial progress and the Petitioner being permanent resident of the district of Kendrapara, there remains no scope on the part of the Petitioner to flee from justice and tamper the witness as most of the witnesses are officials.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State opposes the move in view of the quantity of ganja involved in the case. According to him, the stage is too early to take the view as submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner.

¶21

Considering the submissions made; further keeping in view the nature of accusation and taking into account other surrounding circumstances including the period of detention of the Petitioner in custody, I am inclined to grant bail to the Petitioner. Accordingly, 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.

¶22

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶23

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶24

(D.Dash) Judge

¶25

Basu

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Biswanath Parmanik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biswanath Parmanik 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

Kuber Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Kandarpa Chhuti Vs State of Odisha

V.Krishna @ Krishna Veeragani Vs State of Odisha

Hnrudanand Sahoo Vs Sri Sri Ananta Gopal

Jhatu Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Pravat Jena Vs State of Odisha