Pandita Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the StateOpposite Party. Perused the materials placed before this Court. 3. The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection with Special Case No.57/2012, arising out of Excise Angul Sadar Range Case No.45/2012-13, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, Angul for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 20(a)(i) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶17

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is in custody since 15.01.2024. He further contended that the Petitioner is aged about 81 years and he is the owner of the land on which cannabis plants were cultivated. He further submitted that the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

antecedent. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on any terms and condition which the Petitioner undertakes to abide by while on bail.

¶20

Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party, on the other hand, opposed the release of the Petitioner on bail on the ground that in the event the Petitioner is released on bail, there is a possibility that he might be involved in similar criminal offences. Learned Additional Standing Counsel submitted that nature of allegation and the contraband used in the present case is itself a threat to the society. Therefore, he submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected at this juncture.

¶21

Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the surrounding facts and circumstances of the present case and further keeping the view the period of detention of the Petitioner in jail custody and the fact that the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedent, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail subject to imposition of stringent conditions.

¶22

Hence, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/(Rupees Twenty thousand) with two local solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter.

¶23

It is open for the Court in seisin over the matter to impose in other conditions to ensure the appearance of the Petitioner in

¶24

// 3 //

¶25

Anil

¶26

Court on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶27

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner is subject to the condition that the court below shall verify whether the Petitioner is having any criminal antecedent of similar nature. In the event it is found that the Petitioner is having any criminal antecedent involving less than commercial quantity, this bail order shall automatically stand revoked.

¶28

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶29

( A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge

¶30

Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 19-Mar-2024 17:30:50

¶31

Signature Not Verified

Pandita Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pandita Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrutyunjay Rout Vs Mir Nadir Ali

Santosh Kumar Toppo Vs Sabir Dutta

Icici Prudential LIC Ltd. Vs Judhisthir Jena

Trinath Guru Vs State of Odisha

Saswat Kumar Digal Vs State of Odisha

Md. Parvej Vs State of Odisha