Allowed

Indrajit Madhi v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC18 Dec 2024BLAPL/8335/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa granted interim bail to two petitioners accused under the NDPS Act for a period of four months due to significant trial delay. The Court also extended the trial period of the lower court by six months after finding no adequate explanation for the delay in disposing of a previous committal order directed to the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted interim bail for four months on security of Rs. 15,000 each with conditions; trial period extended by six months.

Indrajit Madhi Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.8335 of 2024

¶2

1.Indrajit Madhi

¶3

2.Dula Madkami

¶4

…. Petitioners

¶5

Mr.Asit Kumar Jena, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha

¶8

…. Opposite Party Ms.Sarita Moharana, ASC

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER

Order No.

18.12.2024

(Through Hybrid mode)

¶15

This is the second application of the petitioners under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. filed in this Court in connection with Malkangiri P.S. Case No.292 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.129 of 2023, pending in

¶16

the Court of the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri where trial has started against the petitioners and three other co-accused persons for commission of offences punishable under Section 20 (b) (ii) (C)/25/27-A/29 of NDPS Act.

¶17

BLAPL No.438 of 2024 filed by the petitioner-Indrajit Madhi had been dismissed on 04.04.2024 but direction had been issued to the learned trial Court to make an endeavour to dispose of the trial by the end of July, 2024 and copy of the said order had been directed to be sent to the Court of the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri forthwith.

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

On 09.12.2024, the Registry had been directed to call for a report from the learned trial court regarding the present status of the trial and the reasons for delay in completion of the trial.

¶20

Report dated 13.12.2024 of the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri has been received, wherein it is stated as follows:

¶21

“Respectfully, with reference to the subject cited above, I have the honour to submit that, as of now, out of twenty (20) charge sheeted witnesses, two (2) witnesses have been examined on behalf of the prosecution and are on the toe in support of the prosecution. Now the case stands posted to 17.12.2024 for hearing.

¶22

Further, I am to submit that a letter seeking extension for six month for disposal of the case was submitted to the Hon’ble Court vide letter No.4792 dated 31.07.2024. Steps are being taken to procure other material witnesses for their examination in near future.

¶23

This matter may kindly be placed before the Hon’ble Court for reference in BLAPL No.8335 of 2024.”

¶24

From the contents of the report, it is apparent that even though the

¶25

trial was not completed by the end of July, 2024 in spite of request/direction of this Court in BLAPL No.438 of 2024, there has been no request from the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri for extending the time granted for disposal of the case. There is also no explanation in the report regarding the reasons for delay in completion of the trial.

¶26

Page 2 of 4

¶27

Registry shall call for an explanation from the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri for not complying with the order of this Court passed in BLAPL No.438 of 2024 and for giving a perfunctory report before expiry of the period.

¶28

Mr. Asit Kumar Jena, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that false allegations have been made against the petitioners who are in custody since 24.05.2023. He further submits that since the petitioners have no criminal antecedents and trial has been delayed, they may be released on bail.

¶29

Ms.Sarita Moharana, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating that 360 kgs. of ganja has been seized from the dalla of the Eicher in which the present petitioners and coaccused Vikkey Singh, Mukesh Kumar were travelling, for which Section37 of the NDPS Act will be a bar for releasing them on bail.

¶30

Considering the fact that the petitioners are in custody since 24.05.2023 and in spite of direction of this Court in BLAPL No.438 of 2024 to complete the trial by the end of July, 2024, the trial is still pending and there is no explanation from the learned trial Court for failure to complete the trial by the said date and as the petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents, I am inclined to release the petitioner on interim bail for a period of four months so that they can prepare their defence.

¶31

Page 3 of 4

¶32

Let the petitioners – Indrajit Madhi and Dula Madkami be released

¶33

on interim bail for a period of four months from the date of their release on such terms and conditions as the learned trial Court deems it proper,

¶34

after verifying that they do not have any criminal antecedents, including the following conditions:-

¶35

(i) They will furnish cash security of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand each).

¶36

(ii) They shall not indulge in any criminal activity while on bail.

¶37

(iii) They shall not try to tamper with evidence or influence prosecution witnesses while on bail.

¶38

(iv) They shall remain present in the trial Court on each date it is fixed for trial.

¶39

(v) They shall surrender before the learned trial court. immediately after expiry of the interim bail.

¶40

(vi) They will report before the IIC Malkangiri P.S. on every Sunday between 4.00 P.M. to 5.00 P.M. till completion of the trial.

¶41

Violation of any condition will entail in cancellation of the

¶42

interim bail.

¶43

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶44

Time granted to the learned trial Court for completion of trial Signature Not Verifiedis extended by a period of six months from today.

¶45

Digitally Signed Signed by: BICHITRANANDA SAHOO [ Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 24-Dec-2024 21:13:00

¶46

[

¶47

Bichi

¶48

Page 4 of 4

Indrajit Madhi v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indrajit Madhi 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

Panchanan Behera @ Das Vs State of Odisha

Jagabandhu Chandal Vs State of Odisha

Budhuram Singh Vs State of Odisha

Nagesh Katam Vs State of Odisha

Rohit Harijan Vs State of Odisha

Prasanta Kumar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha