Allowed

Susheet Kumar Kujur v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC3 May 2024BLAPL/1060/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for a petitioner detained for nine months as driver of a vehicle containing seized Ganja. Considering the closure of investigation and pending trial, the petitioner was released on bail subject to stringent conditions and absence of criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with a bond of Rs. 1,00,000/ - and two solvent sureties, subject to stringent conditions.

Susheet Kumar Kujur Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.1060 of 2024

¶2

Susheet Kumar Kujur

¶3

…. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. S.K. Pradhan, Advocate

-Versus-

State of Odisha

…. Opposite Party

Mr. B.P. Tripathy, AGA

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

Order

03.05.2024

No.

Heard Mr. Pradhan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Tripathy, learned AGA for the State.

¶17

Instant petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is filed for release of the petitioner on bail in connection with T.R. No.117 of 2023 of the file of learned 1^st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sambalpur corresponding to P.R. No.71 of 2023-24 of Dhama Excise Station on the grounds stated therein.

¶18

Mr. Pradhan, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was the driver of the vehicle from which the alleged recovery of contraband Ganja was made and seized thereafter. It is further submitted that another accused, who is in custody, was an occupant and in presence of both, the alleged recovery and seizure was accomplished. It is also submitted that the contraband substance was recovered from inside the vehicle and for its dickey with quantity of 54 Kgs of Ganja. It is informed to the Court by Mr. Pradhan that the final PR is already submitted in the

¶19

Page 1 of 4

¶20

meantime with the closure of investigation, hence, under the above circumstances, he should be allowed to go on bail.

¶21

Mr. Tripathy, learned AGA for the State on the other hand requests for an adjournment to collect the criminal antecedent of the petitioner. It is also informed by Mr. Tripathy, learned AGA that the case diary is not available with him. Considering the fact that the matter has suffered adjournments twice for the said purpose, the Court is not inclined to allow more time to the State for causing production of the case diary and instead is inclined to dispose of the petition on merit.

¶22

In course of hearing, on enquiry from the Court, Mr. Pradhan, learned counsel for the petitioner claims that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedent and his release may be considered subject to absence of any such criminal antecedent.

¶23

Perused the PR as at Annexure-1.

¶24

Admittedly, commercial quantity of Ganja has been seized on being recovered from the alleged vehicle. It is not denied that the petitioner was a driver of the said vehicle. It is also made to reveal that the other accused being the occupant was traveling in the vehicle at the point of time. The recovery is in relation to three packets of 18 Kgs each, one of which was found in the rear seat of the vehicle, whereas, the other two, in its dickey. Of course, no any explanation on record coming forth from the petitioner on the alleged recovery. At this juncture, Mr. Pradhan, learned counsel for the petitioner pleads that since there has been closure of investigation and petitioner though an outsider and from the State

¶25

Page 2 of 4

¶26

of Chhattisgarh has remained in judicial custody since 19^th July, 2023 and hence, should be allowed to go on bail on any such stringent condition as would be imposed by the court. It is further informed to the Court by Mr. Pradhan, learned counsel for the petitioner that in the meantime, the charge has been framed with the commencement of trial, however, he has no instructions as to the present status.

¶27

Considering the above facts and since there is detention of the petitioner in judicial custody for nearly nine months and the investigation is concluded with the trial to have commenced recently, closure which is unlikely to be take place in near future, notwithstanding the alleged recovery and seizure shown against him, which is of course relates to a commercial quantity of Ganja, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case so revealed from Annexure-1, the Court is of the humble view that he should be released on bail with stringent conditions,

¶28

9. Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶29

In the result, the petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. stands allowed. Consequently, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with T.R. No.117 of 2023 arising out of P.R. No.71 of 2023-24 subject to him furnishing a bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/-(rupees fifty thousand) with two solvent sureties for the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 1^st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sambalpur, who shall impose such other suitable conditions as deemed just and proper besides the following, such as, he shall attend the trial and remain present on each date of posting till the same concluded and furthermore, shall

¶30

Page 3 of 4

¶31

not involve himself in any such criminal activity while on bail. However, it is directed that such release of the petitioner shall be subject to absence of him having any other criminal antecedent of similar nature.

¶32

The BLAPL is disposed of.

¶33

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

¶34

(R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

¶35

TUDU

¶36

Signature Not Verified

¶37

Digitally Signed Signed by: THAKURDAS TUDU Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: OHC,CTC Date: 03-May-2024 18:58:01

¶38

Page 4 of 4

Susheet Kumar Kujur v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Susheet Kumar Kujur 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

Raja Naik Vs State of Odisha

Ananda Saraf Vs Shyama Kumar Saraf

Udit Narayan Panda Vs Stae of Odisha

Sameer Pattnaik Vs State of Odisha

Padu Patra Vs State of Odisha

Sonali Dash Vs State of Odisha