Allowed¶18

Rajib Basantara @ Rajeeb Basantara v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC30 Apr 2026BLAPL/13431/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

BLAPL No.13431 of 2025, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Justice G. Satapathy, decided 30.04.2026. Bail under S.483 BNSS granted in NDPS case (S.21(b) NDPS Act; Sec.37 not attracted) involving seizure/transport of 1173 bottles of Eskuf Cough Syrup containing 234 grams Codeine Phosphate; petitioner in custody since 19.11.2025, charge-sheet submitted, no antecedents; conditional bail, bonds Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted under S.483 BNSS on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety for the like amount, subject to verification of the petitioner's criminal antecedents; benefit of the order withheld if similar NDPS antecedents are found. ¶18

Rajib Basantara @ Rajeeb Basantara Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, charge-sheeted under S.21(b) of the NDPS Act (an offence not attracting Sec.37 NDPS Act) in Rasol PS No.338 of 2025 / CT(Special) NDPS Case No.32 of 2025, should be admitted to bail under S.483 of the BNSS Act.

¶13

Court's answer

Taking into account custody since 19.11.2025, submission of the charge-sheet, absence of reported criminal antecedents, and that the offence under S.21(b) NDPS Act does not attract Sec.37 NDPS Act, the Court admitted the petitioner to bail without expressing any view on merits, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

The bail application was allowed; the petitioner was permitted to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the court in seisin, on such terms and conditions as it deems fit.

¶18

Key takeaways

In line with the specific submission advanced for the petitioner, the benefit of the bail order shall not be extended to him if he is found to have any criminal antecedent of a similar nature for commission of an offence under the NDPS Act.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

NDPS bail — application under S.483 BNSS allowed. Petitioner, detained since 19.11.2025 in Rasol PS No.338 of 2025 (CT(Special) NDPS Case No.32 of 2025, Special Court, Dhenkanal) for allegedly transporting 1173 bottles of Eskuf Cough Syrup (100 ML each) containing 234 grams of Codeine Phosphate, was charge-sheeted under S.21(b) NDPS Act, which does not attract Sec.37 NDPS Act. With no criminal antecedent reported and the charge-sheet filed, the Court, invoking 'bail is the rule, but jail is the exception', admitted him to bail without expressing any view on merits, subject to verification of antecedents; bail bonds fixed at Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety; benefit of the order not to extend if similar NDPS antecedents are found.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.13431 of 2025

¶2

Rajib Basantara @ Rajeeb Basantara

¶3

… Petitioner

¶4

Mr. S.K. Dash, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Orissa

¶7

… Opposite Party

¶8

Mr. M.R. Patra, Addl. PP

¶9

Order No.

¶10

02.

¶11

CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL) 30.04.2026

¶12

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

¶13

This is an application U/S.483 of BNSS Act by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Rasol PS No.338 of 2025 corresponding to CT(Special) NDPS Case No.32 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Judge Special Court, Dhenkanal for commission of offences punishable U/S. 21(b) of the NDPS Act, on the main allegation of transporting 1173 bottles of Eskuf Cough Syrup each measuring 100ML containing total 234grams of Codeine Phosphate.

¶14

Heard, Mr. Soubhagya Kumar Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.R. Patra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record. On being queried about the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, Mr. Dash volunteers to withhold bail to the petitioner, if he is found to have any criminal antecedent of similar nature for commission of offence under NDPS Act.

¶15

After having considered the rival submissions and on going through the material placed on record and regard

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

being had to the pre-trial detention of the Petitioner in custody since 19.11.2025 with submission of charge-sheet in the meantime and there being no criminal antecedent reported against the petitioner and the petitioner being charge-sheeted for commission of offence punishable U/S.21(b) of NDPS Act which does not attract the provision of Sec.37 of NDPS Act and taking into account the other circumstances on record in entirety including the wellrecognized principle “bail is the rule, but jail is the exception”, this Court without expressing any view on merit admits the Petitioner to bail, but subject to verification of his criminal antecedents.

¶18

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stand allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it.

¶19

In view of the specific submission as advanced for the petitioner, the benefit of this order shall not be extended to the petitioner, if he is found to have any criminal antecedent of similar nature for commission of offence under NDPS Act

¶20

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. 7. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. A soft copy of this order be immediately communicated to the Signature Not Verifiedconcerned Court, who shall afterwards communicate the Digitally SignedSigned by: JAYAKRUSHNA DASHsame to the concerned Jail through e-mail for reference. Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 01-May-2026 10:49:02

¶21

(G. Satapathy) Judge

¶22

Jayakrushna

¶23

Page 2 of 2

Rajib Basantara @ Rajeeb Basantara v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajib Basantara @ Rajeeb Basantara 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dillip Kumar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Bhagyabati Mahananda Vs State of Odisha

Bichitra Patra Vs State of Odisha

Rudra Madhab Mohapatra Vs State of Odisha

Tapan Kumar Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Pananga Narayan Dash @ Pinu Vs State of Odisha