Disposed

Marka Majhi v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC13 Sept 2023ABLAPL/8653/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application for pre-arrest bail under Sec 438 Cr.P.C regarding alleged narcotics offences, the court found insufficient direct material to implicate petitioners and held Sec 37 N.D.P.S. was not attracted. Bail was denied on pre-arrest basis but granted if petitioners surrender within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail denied; criminals granted condition to surrender within four weeks for regular bail.

Marka Majhi Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No.8653 of 2023

¶3

Marka Majhi and another

¶4

…. Petitioners Mr. B.R. Das, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opp. Party Mr. Sitikanta Mishra, A.S.C.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

13.09.2023

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

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the Opposite Party-State.

¶16

This is an application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. filed by the Petitioners for pre-arrest bail.

¶17

The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.5 of 2023, arising out of Mohana P.S. Case No.5 of 2023, pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Gajapati, Paralakhemundi for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 20(a)(i) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶18

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that only on the basis of suspicion, the Petitioners have been implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the Petitioner No.2 is a

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

regular teacher in a school.

¶21

This Court on a careful examination of the F.I.R., is of the view that no doubt the allegations made in the F.I.R. are serious in nature, however, there is no material to implicate the Petitioners directly in the alleged offence. Moreover, the bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act would not be attracted in the present case inasmuch as the Petitioners were neither apprehended from the spot nor any contraband article was recovered from their exclusive and conscious possession.

¶22

Referring to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh v. The State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2013) 16 SCC 31 , learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that on the basis of the statement of some of the co-accused persons, the Petitioners cannot be implicated in case of this nature.

¶23

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the Petitioner on the ground that the allegations are serious in nature. He further contended that the illegal cannabis plantations are on rise in some of the districts of the State. Therefore, the same be dealt with a strong hand.

¶24

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the materials on record as well as on perusal of the surrounding facts and circumstances of the case, this Court though not inclined to release the Petitioners on pre-arrest bail, however, directs that in the event the Petitioners surrender before the Court in seisin over the mater within a period of four weeks from today and move an application for bail, the Court in seisin over the matter shall release them on bail in connection with the aforesaid case on such terms and

¶25

// 3 //

¶26

conditions as it may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case with further condition that they shall not indulge in similar criminal activities while on bail and shall cooperate with the investigation and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when their presence is required and also appear before the trial court on each and every date of posting of the case. Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

¶27

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioners is subject to the condition that learned court below shall verify whether the Petitioners have any criminal antecedent of similar nature. In the event it is found that the Petitioners have any criminal antecedent of similar nature, this bail order shall automatically stand revoked.

¶28

Accordingly, the ABLAPL is disposed of.

¶29

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶30

( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge

¶31

Debasis

¶32

Signature Not Verified

¶33

Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: OHC CUTTACK Date: 16-Sep-2023 18:43:40

Marka Majhi v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Marka Majhi 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagan Jena Vs State of Odisha

Sudhansu Naik@Sudha Vs State of Odisha

Bhagirathi Padhi Vs State of Odisha

Bhaskar Samal @ Bhasia Samal Vs State of Odisha

Rajat Kumar Mohanta Vs State of Odisha

Arunabala Bisoyee Vs State of Odisha