Allowed

Md. Shahwaj Ansari v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC11 May 2023BLAPL/1757/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa allowed the second bail application of an N.D.P.S. accused. Applying Section 439 CrPC and Section 37 N.D.P.S., the court held trial delay attracts the statutory bar barring leniency based on quantity, yet granted bail on ₹50,000 with strict conditions including territory jurisdiction and verification of antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail bond of Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties subject to verification of criminal antecedents and strict conditions including territory restriction and monthly surrender.

Md. Shahwaj Ansari Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.1757 of 2023

¶3

Md. Shahwaj Ansari …. Petitioner Mr. D. Panda, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

State of Odisha

¶6

…. Opposite Party

¶7

Mr. P.C. Das, A.S.C.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

11.05.2023

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

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Perused the F.I.R., case diary and other relevant documents as well as statement of the witnesses.

¶15

This is an application under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

¶16

The petitioner is an accused in T.R. No.23 of 2019 arising out of Jeypore Town P.S. Case No.102 of 2019 pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge-Special Judge, Koraput-Jeypore for commission of offence punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶17

The present bail application is the second journey of the Petitioner to this Court. The earlier bail application bearing BLAPL No.7626 of 2019 which was disposed of by this Court vide order

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

dated 14.09.2022 directing the Trial Court to conclude the Trial within a period of the three months. Further, liberty was granted to the Petitioner to move a fresh bail application, in the event the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid time. Since the trial is not concluded within the time stipulation the petitioner moves a fresh bail application. The said bail application having been rejected the Petitioner has filed the present bail application before this Court.

¶20

Prosecution story as narrated in the bail application is as follows:-

¶21

One Jitendra Nayak who is working as the SI of Jeypore Town PS had lodged a written report F.I.R. on 25.05.2019 at about 10 A.M. stating to the fact that while he along with some of his co-staffs were doing day patrolling duty near Glocal Hospital Road and while they were moving from Glocal Hospital side towards Jayanagar side at about 12.10 P.M. they noticed one cement colour Innova Car bearing registration number OD-14-G-7114, which was moving from Glocal Hospital side towards Jayanagar side in an abnormal speed and overtake their vehicle. On suspicious as the vehicle was running in an abnormal speed they chased the said vehicle and able to stop the vehicle. At Jayanagar By-Pass at about 12.15 P.M. The said vehicle had two occupants including the driver. On suspicious while verifying the said vehicle they found white colour jerry bags were there at the back seat of the car from which acute smell of ganja was coming out of it. On being weighing it was about 221 Kg and 500 Grams.

¶22

It is submitted Mr. Panda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner is a driver of the vehicle was arrested along with another co-accused persons on 20.05.2019 from the spot a

¶23

// 3 //

¶24

total quantity of 221 Kg and 500 Grams of contraband ganja was recovered from the vehicle. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that although the Petitioner is in custody since 20.05.2019 i.e. near about 4 years. However, the trial has not progress substantially. He further submitted on perusal of the impugned order it appears 8 witnesses have been examined out of 27. On such ground learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail subject to any terms and conditions as would be deemed fit and proper by this Court.

¶25

Leaned Additional Standing Counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the Petitioner and submits that number of such cases are increasing day-by-day and no leniency should be shown to the Petitioner or similarly situated persons and that the petitioner belongs to the State of Chhattisgarh. Further, it is contended by learned Additional Standing Counsel that release of the Petitioner at this stage would cause delay in disposal of the trial. It is further contended that since huge quantity of ganja was recovered in the present case the Petitioner should not be dealt leniently.

¶26

Considering the submissions made by learned counsels for the Parties and further a conspectus of the surrounding facts and circumstances of the present case and keeping in view the fact that the Petitioner is in custody since 4 years and only 8 witnesses have been examined so far out of total 27 witness. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the trial is being unnecessarily forelong and keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Muslim vs. State (NCT of Delhi) in Criminal Appeal No.943 of 2023 decided on 28.03.2023, this court is of the view that the bar under section 37 of the NDPS Act would be attracted although the

¶27

// 4 //

¶28

quantity of contraband ganja seized is more than commercial quantity considering the delay in trial. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter subject to the following conditions:-

¶29

I. The Petitioner shall not be involved in any offence of similar nature;

¶30

II. he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or try to threaten or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever;

¶31

III. he shall not make any default in attending the court during trial;

¶32

IV. he shall appear before the concerned Police Station once in a month preferably on ‘Sunday’ in between 10.00 A.M. to 1.00 P.M. till conclusion of trial; and

¶33

V. he shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court in seisin over the matter and shall furnish his address and mobile number to the police from time to time.

¶34

Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

¶35

Further, the release of the Petitioner shall also be subject to verification of the similar Criminal Antecedent of the Petitioner. In the event, the Court in seisin over the matter is found the Petitioner is involved in similar criminal incident involving allegation under the

¶36

// 5 //

¶37

NDPS Act, then this bail order shall automatically stand revoked.

¶38

The Bail Application is accordingly disposed of.

¶39

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

¶40

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

¶41

Anil

¶42

Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR ANIL KUMAR SAHOO SAHOO Date: 2023.05.13 12:32:15 +05'30'

Md. Shahwaj Ansari v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Shahwaj Ansari 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

Dhiren Naik Vs Union of India

Niranjan Panigrahi Vs State of Odisha

Debaki Behera Vs State of Odisha

Balwinder Singh Vs State of Odisha

Bapita Majhi Vs State of Odisha

Karnam Ramakrishna Vs State of Odisha