Third bail application under Section 439 CrPC regarding charges under the NDPS Act concerning a large quantity of ganja. The court, observing the quantity of contraband and surrounding circumstances, refused the prayer for bail, advising rapid trial conclusion instead.
Bail application dismissed; no reconsideration of previous bail orders permitted.
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.9516 OF 2020
This is the third journey of this petitioner who is in custody in connection with R. Udaygiri P.S. Case No.82 of 2019 corresponding to G.R. case No. 48 of 2019 on the file of learned Special Judge-cum-Sessions Judge, Gajapati at Paralakhemundi running for alleged commission of offence under section 20(b)(ii)(C)/25/29 of the 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, further keeping in view the quantity of contraband ganja said to have been seized from the vehicle in which the Petitioner was travelling as those emanates from the materials on record, and on going through the earlier orders dated 11.12.2019 and 28.05.2020 passed by this Court in BLAPL No.8668 of 2019 & BLAPL No.1503 of 2020, as also the surrounding circumstances, I am not inclined to reconsider the prayer for grant of bail to the Petitioner. It however observed that the trial court would do well to take all such effective steps as provided in law for early conclusion of the trial.
The BLAPL is accordingly dismissed. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
Narayan
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to reconsider the prayer for bail in a narcotics case involving significant quantity of contraband.
Whether bail should be granted during the journey of trial given the seizure quantity and prior orders.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
State
Narayan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
