Birendra Kumar Mangaraj @ Bapi Vs State of Odisha

F.I.R. No.	Dated	Police Station	Case No. and Courts’ Name	Sections
17	01.06.2020	S.T.F.	T.R. Case No.226 of 2020 pending in the court of learned 2^nd Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar	Section 21(c)/29 of NDPS Act

¶11

¶12

This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

¶14

The petitioner being in custody in connection with STF PS Case No.17 of 2020 corresponding to TR Case No. 226 of

¶15

Signature Not Verified

¶16

Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 11-Jul-2025 14:20:59

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

2020, pending in the court of the learned Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar, registered for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 21(C) and 29 of the NDPS Act, has filed this petition for his release on bail.

¶19

The fact of the prosecution case is that on 01.06.2020, the informant, who was the Inspector of Police, STF, Bhubaneswar on being received credible information regarding some habitual traders of Brown sugar, were planning to deliver such contraband in Bhubaneswar, she along with other staff proceed to Kalinga Vihar and they detained the petitioner who was coming from Khurda by a Hero Hond Motor Ccycle bearing Regd. No.OR 02 D 2640. On being searched, one white polythene pocket containing 1.008 KG of contraband brown sugar recovered from the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner was forwarded to Court.

¶20

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the contraband brown sugar was not recovered from his conscious and exclusive possession. He further submits that the Petitioner is in custody since 02.06.2020. Hence, he submits that the Petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the petitioner. He further submits that the

¶22

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 11-Jul-2025 14:20:59

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

source of procurement of the contraband is yet to be ascertained and the criminal antecedents of the petitioner are under scrutiny.

¶25

Considering the nature and gravity of the accusation, character of evidence appearing against the petitioner and the stringent punishment provided and also the statutory bar to grant bail under Section 37(1) of the NDPS Act in an offence of this nature without recording the satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence alleged or not likely to commit any such offence, which is not possible to record in this case, the petitioner’s prayer for bail is devoid of merit. Hence, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

¶26