Allowed

Apurba Mandal @ Mondal v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC22 Mar 2023BLAPL/128/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hearing a bail petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C against a special court order rejecting bail. The High Court directed release on bail with periodic appearance, bonded family member, and antecedent verification.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail with terms to appear monthly to police station, family member execute bond, and call for criminal antecedents.

Apurba Mandal @ Mondal Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.128 of 2023

¶3

Apurba Mandal @ Mondal & …. Petitioners another

¶4

Mr. A.P. Bose, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. A. Pradhan, ASC

¶5

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

¶6

ORDER 22.03.2023

¶7

Order No.

¶8

1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

¶9

The Petitioners are accused in Special Case No.39 of 2022 pending on the file of learned Sessions -cum- Special Judge, Boudh arising out of Baunsuni P.S. Case No.91 of 2022 for commission of the alleged offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act.

¶10

Being aggrieved by the rejection of their application for bail U/s. 439 Cr.P.C by the learned Special Judge, Boudh by order dated 19.10.2022 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

¶11

It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioners along with co-accused are in custody since 18.09.2022 on the accusation of possessing contraband to the tune of 29 Kg. 800 grams of ganja.

¶12

Page 1 of 3

¶13

It is further submitted that since charge sheet has been filed on 10.1.2023, further continuance of the Petitioners in custody is not warranted.

¶14

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioners that the manner in which the seizure has been effected from a public place, conscious and exclusive possession cannot be attributed to them and merely because they have started running seeing the police party, they have been cited as accused.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer in view of the bar contained in Section 37 of the N.D.P.S Act. 8. Considering the manner of accusation, this Court directs the Petitioners to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned court in seisin.

¶16

Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioners shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once every month on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin till conclusion of trial. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin.

¶17

To allay the legitimate apprehension of the learned Public Prosecutor regarding ensuring the presence of Petitioners during trial since they do not belong to the State of Odisha, additionally it is directed that one of the family members of the Petitioners shall execute the P.R bond in addition to the sureties in terms of the order of the learned Court in seisin and their criminal antecedents from P.S./Dist. Murshidabad, West Bengal shall also be called for.

¶18

Page 2 of 3

¶19

If it comes to fore that the Petitioners have similar criminal antecedents , this order shall stand recalled.

¶20

The BLAPL thus stands disposed of.

¶21

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.

¶22

(V. NARASINGH) Judge

¶23

PKS

¶24

Page 3 of 3

Apurba Mandal @ Mondal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Apurba Mandal @ Mondal 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

Sudhiranjan Majhi @ Shikun Vs State of Odisha

Bennela Umashankar @ v. Umashankar Vs State of Odisha

Samirul Goldar Vs State of Odisha

Kuanwar Munda Vs State of Odisha

Thengu @ Samira Nayak @ Sameer Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Joga Hial Vs State of Odisha