Allowed

Rabindra Digal v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC26 Jun 2023BLAPL/631/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This high court allowed a bail application filed by Rabindra Digal under Section 439 CrPC for a narcotics offense. The petitioner, not apprehended with contraband and having surrendered after interim bail, was granted bail subject to conditions despite Section 37 NDPS Act implications.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on furnishing bonds of Rs.50,000 each with two sureties, subject to conditions of attendance, no travel without permission, and weekly reporting at the police station.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.631 of 2023

¶2

Rabindra Digal

¶3

Petitioner

¶4

Mr. B.P.Chhualsingh, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

… Opposite Party Mr. S.R.Roul, ASC

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

ORDER

26.06.2023

Order No.

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

¶13

This is a bail application U/S.439 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with C.T. Case No.27 of 2022 arising out of Balliguda P.S. Case No.105 of 2022 pending in the file of learned Special Judge-cum-A.D.J., Balliguda for commission of offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act on the allegation of transporting 31 Kgs. 300Grams of Contraband Ganja in an Auto Rickshaw bearing registration No. OD-12-D-0663.

¶14

In the course of hearing of the bail application, Mr. B.P.Chhualsingh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused in this case, but he was never apprehended with Contraband Ganja nor was he riding

¶15

Page 1 of 4

¶16

the Auto Rickshaw at the relevant point of time and the petitioner having granted interim bail for a period of one month has voluntarily surrendered in the Court without misusing the liberty so granted to him and the present petitioner has been implicated in the present case only on the basis of statement of owner of the Auto after six months of the occurrence. It is, further, submitted that in the meanwhile charge sheet has already been submitted in this case and the petitioner having been detained in custody since 13.11.2022, may kindly be granted bail.

¶17

On the other hand, Mr. S.R.Roul, learned ASC, however, candidly submits that the petitioner was not apprehended with the Contraband Ganja, but he having an agreement with the owner of the Auto Rickshaw was found on prima facie materials to have transported commercial quantity of Contraband Ganja and, therefore, he is not entitled to bail in view of mandate of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

¶18

After having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of accusations raised against the petitioner and keeping in view the manner and circumstance of implication of the present petitioner and regard being had to the pretrial detention of the petitioner since 13.11.2022 and the fact that the petitioner was not apprehended along with Contraband Ganja, which prima facie satisfy the pre-

¶19

Page 2 of 4

¶20

requisite condition of Section 37 of NDPS Act and the petitioner having not misused the liberty so granted to him in the form of interim bail, this Court admits the petitioner to bail.

¶21

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it with following conditions:-

¶22

(i) the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail,

¶23

(ii) the petitioner shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless his attendance is dispensed with,

¶24

(iii) the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case and

¶25

(iv) the petitioner shall report attendance before the Jurisdictional Police Station once in a week preferably on Sunday of every week in between 10 A.M. to 12 Noon for six(06) months from the actual date of release from the custody.

¶26

The I.I.C. of Jurisdictional Police Station shall

¶27

not detain the petitioner unnecessarily after recording his attendance beyond the time as stipulated.

¶28

Page 3 of 4

¶29

It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the

¶30

case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the petitioner for any offence under NDPS Act in future on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶31

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

¶32

Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per

¶33

Rules.

¶34

(G. Satapathy) Judge

¶35

Kishore

¶36

Signature Not Verified

¶37

Digitally Signed Signed by: KISHORE KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 27-Jun-2023 10:30:08

¶38

Page 4 of 4

Rabindra Digal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rabindra 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

Krishna Baidya Vs State of Odisha

Muna Swain Vs State of Odisha

Deepak Ranjan Pandey Vs State of Odisha

Binu@ Biswajit Mohanta Vs State of Odisha

Amar @ Amarnath Majhi @ Amara Nath Majhi Vs State of Odisha

Madhusudan Naik Vs State of Odisha