Sana @ Sanatan Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State. Perused the records. 3. This is an application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. filed by the Petitioner for anticipatory bail, involving offence punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/25/29 of N.D.P.S. Act in T.R. Case No.25 of 2025 arising out of Gunupur P.S. Case No.30 of 2025 of the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Gunupur.

¶16

It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner was not present at the spot of occurrence and that he was implicated on the statement of co-accused. He also submitted that such statement of co-accused is not admissible in evidence and that the Petitioner does not have

¶17

Page 1 of 3.

¶18

any criminal antecedent and that since the Petitioner belongs to the locality, there is no chance of his absconding.

¶19

Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party, on the other hand, objected to the release of the Petitioner on bail on the ground that the investigation is still on. He further submitted that the cases of illegal transportation of contraband article are on rise in State of Odisha now-a-days. Therefore, no leniency should be shown to the accused persons who are involved in such type of offence. In such view of the matter, it is submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected at this juncture. 6. Considering the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties, it is observed that the Petitioner, if so advised, may surrender before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cumSpecial Judge, Gunupur, in the aforesaid case within four weeks from today. In the event the Petitioner surrenders and moves for bail within the aforesaid period, learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Gunupur, shall do well to dispose of the bail application of the Petitioner on the same day on merit in accordance with law keeping in view the fact that the Petitioner has been implicated on the basis of coaccused statement and does not have any criminal antecedent. Further, while considering the bail application of the Petitioner, learned Court in seisin over the matter shall apply the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2021) 4 SCC 1. The case diary be made available to the concerned court to facilitate disposal of the bail application of the Petitioner. Release of the Petitioner shall be subject to the

¶20

Page 2 of 3.

¶21

Sisir

¶22

verification of criminal antecedent. In the event it is found that the Petitioner is having any criminal antecedent, this order shall not be given effect to.

¶23

The ABLAPL is disposed of accordingly.

¶24

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

¶25

( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIR KUMAR SETHI Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 27-Apr-2026 16:11:40

¶28

Page 3 of 3.

Sana @ Sanatan Nayak v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sana @ Sanatan Nayak 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

Rekha Routh Vs State of Odisha

Deepak Digar Vs State of Odisha

Bijay Kumar Behera Vs State of Odisha

Kshirod Chandra Patri Vs State of Odisha

Niranjan Rout Vs the Vice Chancellor, Utkal University, Vani Vihar, Bbsr

Suman Samal Vs State of Odisha