In the second bail hearing (BLAPL No.4418 of 2020), the court refused to reconsider the prayer for bail to a petitioner in custody for an NDPS offence involving ganja, dismissing the application.
The BLAPL No.4418 of 2020 stands dismissed. Bail is not granted.
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.4418 OF 2020
03. 13.04.2021
This matter is taken up through Video Conferencing
mode.
This is the 2nd journey of the Petitioner who is in custody in T.R. Case No.14 of 2019 arising out of Boriguma P.S. Case No.56 of 2019 pending in the court of learned Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge, Koraput-Jeypore for alleged commission of offence under section 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of NDPS Act, in filing this application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for his release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Considering the submissions made and on going through the materials available on record including the quantity of ganja seized; I am not inclined to reconsider the prayer for grant bail to the Petitioner.
Accordingly, the BLAPL stands dismissed.
As the restrictions due to the COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s website or print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed, vide Court’s Notice No. 4587, dated 25th March, 2020.
……………………..
D. Dash, J.
Aks
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case under sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 NDPS Act given the quantity of ganja seized.
Whether the court should reconsider the earlier bail rejection.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
State
D. Dash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
