Tabinga Digal Vs State of Odisha

1 . The petitioner is an accused in connection with 2(a)CC Case No. 68 of 2025 arising out of P.R. No. 63 of 2025-26 registered on the allegation of the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act, pending in the Court of the learned Special Judge-cum-ADJ, Balliguda.

¶17

The petitioner had approached the learned Special Judgecum-ADJ, Balliguda in 2(a)CC Case No. 68 of 2025 praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 19.12.2025 rejected the bail application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for enlargement on bail.

¶18

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction from the petitioner, submits that, except the present bail application, no other bail application of the petitioner is pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R.

¶19

3. The prosecution case is that on 17.12.2025 the Inspector

¶20

Page 1 of 3

¶21

of Excise Station, Balliguda drawn a prosecution report bearing P.R. No.63 of 2025-26 that on the same day when he along with her staff were performing patrolling duty, they noticed that two persons were coming towards M. Rampur in high speed in their vehicle, namely, Honda Shine 100 DX vehicle bearing Regd. No. OD-12-G-7690. Seeing the police party, the accused tried to escape from the spot and after being short chase, they nabbed them. On being search they found 12 kg. contraband ganja. On being asked they disclosed their identity and could not able to produce any authority for possession and transportation of the same. Thereafter, they arrested the accused persons and also seized the contraband ganja.

¶22

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that total 12 kg of ganja has been allegedly recovered from the present petitioner, which is less than the commercial quantity. The petitioner has been in custody since 17.12.2025 and the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

¶23

5. The petitioner has very specifically averred in paragraph-8 of the petition that he has no criminal antecedents, which reads as under:-

¶24

“8. That so far as the fact of the case is concerned the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing has been seized from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It is mention here that the contraband Ganja is below commercial quantity section 37 of the NDPS Act is not bar to release the petitioner on bail. The petitioner having no criminal antecedent, the bail application may be favourably consider.”

¶25

6. Taking into consideration the quantity of contraband recovered from the petitioner and the period of custody of the

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

petitioner since 17.12.2025, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶28

7. Hence, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it would deem just and proper, subject to the following additional conditions:

¶29

(i) The petitioner shall appear before the I.I.C. of the concerned Police Station on every last Sunday of the month between 10.00 A.M. and 12.00 Noon for at least three months;

¶30

(ii) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court till the disposal of the trial;

¶31

(iii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each date on which the case is posted for trial;

¶32

(iv) He shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner

¶33

whatsoever;

¶34

(v) He shall not commit any offence while on bail, and

¶35

(vi) He shall be released on bail subject to verification of similar type of antecedents.

¶36

In the event the petitioner is found wanting for violation of any of the bail conditions imposed by this Court or the trial Court even on a single occasion, the prosecution is at liberty to move appropriate application before the Court below for cancellation of the concession of bail granted by this Court. If such application is filed, the trial Court should decide the application on its own merit.

¶37

8. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶38

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA Designation: SecretaryAshok Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 06-Jan-2026 18:05:42

¶39

Judge

¶40

Page 3 of 3

Tabinga Digal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tabinga Digal 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

Sankar Sabar Vs State of Odisha

Satyajit Dhal Vs State of Odisha

Ashok Kumar Khatua Vs State of Odisha

Dharani Bagarti Vs State of Odisha

Dushasan Mallick Vs State of Odisha

Raju Beero Vs State of Odisha