Disposed

Krushna Chandra Natha v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC18 Apr 2024BLAPL/1953/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail sought by accused in a brown sugar (10 grams) case under Section 21(b) NDPS Act after two earlier rejections citing antecedents. Trial had not progressed since charge framing; no witnesses appeared. Court granted bail on ground of long incarceration and right to speedy trial, with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on terms fixed by the court in seisin; conditions include thrice-weekly police appearances and no leaving Odisha without permission.

Krushna Chandra Natha Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No. 1953 of 2024

¶3

Krushna Chandra Natha

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. G. Mohanty, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha

¶8

…. Opposite Party

¶9

Mr. A. Pradhan, ASC

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

ORDER

18.04.2024

Order No.

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶16

The Petitioner is an accused in connection with T.R. Case No.395 of 2022 pending on the file of learned 3^rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar, arising out of Mancheswar P.S. Case No.344 of 2022 for commission of alleged offence under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act.

¶17

Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. case is pending in any other Court. 4. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned 3^rd Addl. Sessions Judge, BBSR by order dated 16.02.2024 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

¶18

This is the third journey of the Petitioner to this Court. Earlier bail application of the Petitioner i.e. BLAPL No.5632 of

¶19

Page 1 of 5

¶20

2023 was rejected by this Court by order dated 28.06.2023 taking into account the criminal antecedents of the Petitioner including five under the Special Act. Further, bail application of the Petitioner was rejected by this Court by order dated 13.11.2023 in BLAPL No.11809 of 2023. While so rejecting, this Court took note of the criminal antecedent in Paragraphs-7 and 8 of the said order. For convenience of ready reference, Paragraphs-7 and 8 of the said order are extracted hereunder;

¶21

“7. It is seen that the Petitioner is involved in the following cases which is borne out from the affidavit filed at the behest of him.

¶22

“1. Mancheswar P.S. Case No.187/16 U/s.

¶23

307/323/341/ 506/34 IPC. is pending and petitioner is on bail.

¶24

Mancheswar P. S. Case No.273/19 U/s. 21(b)

¶25

NDPS Act is pending and the Petitioner is on bail.

¶26

Mancheswar P.S. Case No.06/20 U/s. 294/506/34

¶27

IPC is pending and the Petitioner is on bail.

¶28

Mancheswar P.S. Case No.165/22 U/s. 21(b)

¶29

NDPS Act is pending and the Petitioner is on bail.

¶30

Infocity P.S. Case No.207/18 U/s. 21(b) NDPS Act

¶31

is pending and the Petitioner is on bail.

¶32

Infocity Case No.66/18, U/s.21(b) NDPS Act is

¶33

pending and the petitioner is on bail.

¶34

Chandrasekharpur P.S. Case No.366/21

¶35

U/s.21(c)/25/29 NDPS Act is pending and the petitioner is on bail.”

¶36

The cases at Serial No.2, 4 to 7 relate to NDPS Act.”

¶37

The allegation against the Petitioner was that the contraband (brown sugar) to the tune of 10 grams was seized from him and on account of the same, he was taken into custody on

¶38

Page 2 of 5

¶39

19.09.2022 and charge sheet in the case at hand has been filed on 13.11.2022.

¶40

It is submitted by the learned counsel that though the Petitioner is in custody since 19.09.2022, there is no progress in trial and as the contraband seized is admittedly less than the commercial quantity, the rigors of Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act are not attracted in the case at hand. The said Section is culled out hereunder for convenience of the ready reference;

¶41

“37.Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),-

¶42

(a) xxx xxx xxx

¶43

(b) no person accused of an offence punishable for [offences under section 19 or section 24 or section 27-A and also for offences involving commercial quantity] shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless-

¶44

(i) xxx xxx xxx

¶45

(ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

¶46

xxx xxx xxx

¶47

Taking into account the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the trial is lingering, a report was called for from the learned Court in seisin. Relevant extract of the said report dated 09.04.2024 reads as under;

¶48

“xxx xxx xxx

¶49

In T.R. Case No.395 of 2022, one accused

¶50

namely Krushna Chandra Natha is forwarded in the Court of Special Judge, Bhubaneswar for allegedly

¶51

Page 3 of 5

¶52

possessing 10 grams of brown sugar by the accused committing the offence punishable U/s.21(b) of N.D.P.S. Act. On 14.11.2022 charge sheet is submitted against the accused. On 23.11.2022 the case record is received by this Court on transfer. The accused is implicated in eight cases out of which five cases are of similar nature. Though charge has been framed against the accused but in spite of issuing summons to the witnesses till date no witnesses appeared. Now the date is fixed to 04.05.2024 for trial. Accordingly, summons has been issued to the witnesses for their examination.

¶53

xxx xxx xxx”

¶54

On a bare perusal of the same, it is seen that though charge has been framed but no witnesses are appearing till date and the Petitioner, as noted, is in custody since 19.09.2022 and there is no progress even after the last rejection dated 13.11.2023 wherein this Court had called upon the learned Court in seisin to conclude the trial expeditiously.

¶55

Hence on the ground of long incarceration, Petitioner seeks release.

¶56

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail more particularly referring to the criminal antecedents of the Petitioner under the Special Act, in view of the second limb of Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act. He also relies on the order of the Apex Court in the case of State by the Inspector of Police vs. B. Ramu in SLP(Crl.) No(s).8137 of 2022 dated 12.02.2024.

¶57

In umpteen number of cases, the Apex Court has held that right to speedy trial is a facet of Fundamental Right. In this context, reference can be made to the case of Hussainara Khatoon & Others Vrs. State of Bihar, reported in (1980) 1 SCC 81 .

¶58

Page 4 of 5

¶59

Taking into account that the Petitioner is in custody since 19.09.2022 and there is no progress in trial and keeping in view the sacred right to speedy trial in an accusation where the grant of bail is an exception (Ref:- State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Kajad reported in (2001) 7 SCC 673 ) and in the light of direction given to conclude the trial expeditiously, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the Court in seisin.

¶60

Additionally, it is directed that Petitioner shall not leave the State of Odisha without express permission of the learned Court in seisin and shall appear before the jurisdictional police station thrice every week on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin till conclusion of trial. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin. Any violation shall entail cancellation in accordance with law without any further reference to this Court.

¶61

It is further directed that one of the family member of the Petitioner shall execute P.R bond in addition to the sureties so fixed.

¶62

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

¶63

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

¶64

(V. NARASINGH) Judge

¶65

Santoshi

¶66

Signature Not Verified

¶67

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTOSHI LENKA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 19-Apr-2024 13:20:38

¶68

Page 5 of 5

Krushna Chandra Natha v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krushna Chandra Natha 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

Siu@Silu Munda@Indwar Vs State of Odisha

Kulu @ Srikanta Kumar Padhi Vs State of Odisha

Dipak Ranjan Biswal Vs State of Odisha

Debiprasad Dash@Chuin Vs State of Odisha

Rajesh Kumar Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Prashant Pangi Vs State of Odisha