Allowed

Saroj Digal v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC16 Nov 2023BLAPL/3469/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Orissa inclined to grant bail to a petitioner charged under the NDPS Act for possession of cannabis exceeding commercial quantity, subject to stringent conditions, noting no prior criminal record.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the petitioner subject to stringent terms and conditions, including immediate filing of application for bail cancellation upon violation or deviation from imposed terms.

Saroj Digal Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No. 3469 of 2023

¶3

Saroj Digal

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr. R.K. Mahapatra, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha

¶8

…. Opp. Party

¶9

Mr. D. Nayak, Addl. Govt. Advocate

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO

¶12

Order No.

¶13

¶14

ORDER 16.11.2023 Hybrid Mode

¶15

The BLAPL has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking release on bail, by the petitioner who is in jail custody in connection with P.R. No.973/2022-23 corresponding to 2(a)CC Case No.3 of 2023 U/s.2(b)(ii)C of NDPS Act now pending in the court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Bhanjanagar, Dist.Ganjam.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the F.I.R. the petitioner was a passenger in the vehicle and after the vehicle was stopped the driver ran away and it is alleged that the petitioner kept mum regarding the material that were kept in the boot space of the car and was seized.

¶17

¶18

It is submitted that though it is not disputed that the 50 Kg. of cannabis was seized from the boot space of the car, which is more than the commercial quantity but no further overt act has been attributed to the petitioner. It is further submitted that there are no past allegations against the petitioner as far as criminal activity is concerned.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if the

¶20

// 2 //

¶21

petitioner is granted bail he shall abide by all such terms and conditions that would be imposed for grant of bail. It is submitted that the petitioner being a local person having roots in the society there is no chance of he escaping the jurisdiction of the learned court in seisin of the matter. 4. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate submits that the contraband seized is more than the commercial quantity. He opposes the prayer for bail referring to the provisions of Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act.

¶22

However, it is not disputed that the petitioner does not have any past allegations against him as far as criminal activity is concerned as per the police report.

¶23

The letter dated 14.09.2023 of the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Bhanjanagar, Ganjam, indicates that 2(a)CC Case No.03 of 2023 was registered on dated 07.02.2023 pursuant to PR No.973/2022-23 U/s.20(b)(ii) of N.D.P.S. Act of SI of Excise EI & EB Unit-Ii, (SD), Berhampur. After investigation, sanctioned PR was submitted against accused/petitioner namely Saroj Digal. Cognizance of offence U/s.20(b)(ii)(C) of N.D.P.S. Act was taken on 10.03.2023. Charge was also framed under aforesaid section of NDPS Act on 31.07.2023 against the accused/petitioner. However, no witness has been examined in this case so far.

¶24

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Govt. Advocate and considering the material on record, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to such stringent terms and conditions that would be imposed by the learned court in seisin of the matter which shall also include a condition that violation of/deviation from any of the terms and

¶25

Page 2 of 3

¶26

// 3 //

¶27

conditions imposed for grant of bail, shall result in filing of the application by the law enforcement agency for cancellation of bail.

¶28

The BLAPL is disposed of accordingly.

¶29

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

¶30

(M.S. Sahoo)

¶31

Judge

¶32

Signature Not Verified

¶33

Digitally Signed Signed by: RADHARANI JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: ohc Date: 24-Nov-2023 15:59:40

¶34

Page 3 of 3

Saroj Digal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saroj Digal 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

Chita Soren Vs Lambodhar Mohanta

Biranchi Narayan Das Vs Akshaya@Raju Behera

Satya Narayan Jena Vs Panchanan Jena

Sunil Sahu Vs Ranjita Sahu

State Vs Gopi Hembram

Kailash Ch.Barik Vs Ashok Sahu