Allowed¶24

Pradeep Majhi v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC24 Apr 2026BLAPL/2254/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

BLAPL No.2254 of 2026; Pradeep Majhi v. State of Odisha; High Court of Orissa; Justice A.K. Mohapatra; order dated 24.04.2026; Section 439 Cr.P.C regular bail; Sections 20(b)(ii)C N.D.P.S. Act; 242 kgs. ganja seizure at Balishahi, R. Udayagiri; parity with co-accused Samuel Raita (BLAPL No.12424 of 2025, order dated 18.02.2026); acquittal in antecedent case; long detention since 24.01.2025; bail bond Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail in G.R Case No.78 of 2023 (R. Udayagiri P.S Case No.91 of 2023) on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount; trial court free to impose further conditions; BLAPL disposed of accordingly. ¶24

Pradeep Majhi Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioner, in custody since 24.01.2025 in G.R Case No.78 of 2023 (R. Udayagiri P.S Case No.91 of 2023) for offence under Sections 20(b)(ii)C of the N.D.P.S. Act (alleged seizure of 242 kgs. ganja), is entitled to regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C, in light of parity with co-accused Samuel Raita (enlarged by the Coordinate Bench in BLAPL No.12424 of 2025) and the Petitioner's acquittal in the antecedent case.

¶16

Court's answer

The Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail, keeping in view the period of detention of the Petitioner in jail custody and the fact that the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedent.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The Petitioner is directed to be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount; the Court in seisin may impose any other just and proper conditions, violation of which shall entail cancellation of the bail.

¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail under S.439 Cr.P.C. — Offence under S.20(b)(ii)C, N.D.P.S. Act — G.R Case No.78 of 2023 arising out of R. Udayagiri P.S Case No.91 of 2023, pending before Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Parlakhemundi — F.I.R. allegation of seizure of 242 kgs. ganja from the back side of the Church at Balishahi, R. Udayagiri — Petitioner in custody since 24.01.2025 — Petitioner's earlier bail application rejected along with that of co-accused Samuel Raita, who was subsequently enlarged on bail by Coordinate Bench order dated 18.02.2026 in BLAPL No.12424 of 2025 — Petitioner's antecedent case ended in acquittal — Held: bail granted; the Court, keeping in view the period of detention in jail custody and the absence of any similar criminal antecedent, inclined to release the Petitioner — bail bond of Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount; trial court may impose further conditions; violation entails cancellation.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2254 of 2026

¶2

Pradeep Majhi

¶3

..... Petitioner

¶4

Represented by Adv. - Soubhagya Kumar Dash

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

..... Opposite Party

¶8

Represented by Adv. – Sasmita Nayak, A.S.C.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

24.04.2026

Order No.

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

¶15

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the StateOpposite Party. Perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶16

The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection with G.R Case No.78 of 2023, arising out of R. Udayagiri P.S Case No.91 of 2023, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Parlakhemundi for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)C of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶17

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is in custody since 24.01.2025. He further

¶18

Page 1 of 3.

¶19

contended that as per the F.I.R. allegation the quantity of ganja seized, i.e., 242 kgs., which was recovered on the back side of the Church at Balishahi, R. Udayagiri. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that one of co-accused, namely, Samuel Raita, whose bail application was earlier rejected along with the Petitioner’s bail application, has been enlarged on bail by order of the Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 18.02.2026 passed in BLAPL No.12424 of 2025. He further contended that both the present Petitioner as well as co-accused, Samuel Raita, stands in a similar footing. She further contended that although the Petitioner was having one similar criminal antecedent, however, in the meantime, he faced the trial and he has been acquitted by the learned trial court.

¶20

Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party, on the other hand, opposed the release of the Petitioner on bail on the ground that in the event the Petitioner is released on bail, there is a possibility that he might be involved in similar criminal offences. Learned Additional Standing Counsel submitted that nature of allegation and the contraband used in the present case is itself a threat to the society. Therefore, he submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected at this juncture.

¶21

Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the surrounding facts and circumstances of the present case and further keeping the view the period of detention of the Petitioner in jail custody and the fact that the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedent, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail

¶22

Page 2 of 3.

¶23

subject to imposition of stringent conditions.

¶24

Hence, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/(Rupees fifty thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter.

¶25

It is open for the Court in seisin over the matter to impose any other conditions as may be deemed just and proper. Violation of any of the conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail application.

¶26

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶27

( A.K. Mohapatra)

¶28

Judge

¶29

Anil

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Page 3 of 3.

¶32

Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 24-Apr-2026 19:23:36

Pradeep Majhi v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Majhi 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

Debendra Pani @ Debendra Kumar Pani Vs State of Odisha

Sana @ Sanatan Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Aniya @ Ajit Ganda Vs State of Odisha

Damayanti Panda Vs Usha Padhy, Principal Sec., Housing and Urban Develp. Dept., Odisha

Siba Prasad Dutta Vs Dilip Routrai, Colector, Bhadrak

Keshab Chandra Sahoo Vs State of Odisha