Rajesh Kumar Sahu Vs State of Odisha

The Petitioner is an accused in connection with C.T. Case No.59 of 2023, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, Phulbani, arising out of Phiringia P.S. Case No.51 of 2023 , for alleged commission of offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/25/29 of NDPS Act.

¶16

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.

¶17

Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Special Judge, Phulbani, by order dated 31.01.2024 in the aforementioned cases, the present BLAPLs have been filed.

¶18

This is the third journey of the Petitioner to this Court. Earlier the bail application of the Petitioner was not entertained by order dated 03.05.2023 in BLAPL No.4805 of 2023 and thereafter

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

the bail application of the Petitioner was rejected by order dated 07.12.2023 in BLAPL No.11860 of 2023.

¶21

The allegation against the Petitioner is that he was the driver of the auto rickshaw from which the contraband to the tune of 75Kgs (Ganja) was recovered.

¶22

It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner who is the first offender is in custody since 30.03.2023 and in the meanwhile trial has commenced and two independent witnesses examined have not supported the prosecution. Hence, he may be released on bail.

¶23

It is the further submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that some of the co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court by order dated 07.12.2023 by which the bail application of the Petitioner was rejected and subsequently by orders dated 05.04.2024 & 08.04.2024 in BLAPL No.2250 & 2252 of 2024 respectively. Hence, on the ground of parity, the Petitioner seeks release.

¶24

Learned counsel for the State submits that while rejecting the bail application of the Petitioner by order dated 17.12.2023, some of the co-accused were granted bail taking into account that they are ladies. Hence, the same cannot be the ground to be taken into account in the case at hand.

¶25

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the State that since the Petitioner was the driver of the vehicle from which contraband was seized he is on a different footing from other coaccused who have since been released.

¶26

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail in view of the bar contained in Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act and relying on the order of the Apex Court in the case of State by

¶27

Page 2 of 3

¶28

the Inspector of Police vs. B. Ramu in SLP(Crl.) No(s).8137 of 2022 dated 12.02.2024 submits that since charge sheet has already been filed prima facie case is well made out. Hence, the Petitioner ought not to be released on bail, at this stage.

¶29

Taking into account that the Petitioner is the first offender and release of the co-accused as above, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned court in seisin. 13. Before releasing, learned Court in seisin is requested to verify the criminal antecedent of the Petitioner. If it comes to the fore that the Petitioner has any criminal antecedent, this order shall not be given effect to.

¶30

Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once every month 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.

¶31

It is needless to state here that the observations made herein are only for the purpose of consideration of bail and ought not to be understood as this Court expressing any opinion regarding the complicity of the Petitioner and the same has to be adjudicated independently in the impending trial.

¶32

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

¶33

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per the

¶34

rules.

¶35

Signature Not Verified

¶36

(V. NARASINGH) Judge

¶37

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYESHA ROUT Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Ayesha Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 19-Apr-2024 14:51:32

¶38

Page 3 of 3

Rajesh Kumar Sahu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar Sahu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

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

Prashant Pangi Vs State of Odisha

Krushna Chandra Natha Vs State of Odisha