Dibakar Nayak @ D.K. Vs State of Odisha

1 . The petitioner is an accused in connection with Talsari Marine P.S. Case No.79 of 2025 corresponding to Special Case No.20 of 2025 registered on the allegation of the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act, pending in the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Jaleswar.

¶17

2. The petitioner had approached the learned Court below praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 26.02.2026 has rejected the bail application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 praying for enlargement on bail.

¶18

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction from the petitioner, submits that, except the present bail application,

¶19

Page 1 of 4

¶20

no other bail application of the petitioner is pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R.

¶21

4. The prosecution case as per the FIR is that on 08.09.2025 while the informant along with his other Police Staffs were performing patrolling duty at Sahabajipur, Digha Border, they could notice that one person suspiciously moving towards Digha from Chandaneswar side in a blue colour motorcycle bearing Registration No.OD-01AZ-9815 and further seeing the raiding party members the rider of the said motorcycle was tried to flee away from the spot but the informant and his staff with too much difficulty could be able to apprehend the said person. On being interrogation he disclosed his name and identity and further on being search the informant found 30 gms. 500 ml.gms. of brown sugar with transparent polythene packet and further on being asked the said accused person could not able to produce any authenticate document regarding possession of contraband article brown sugar. Thereafter the informant seized the motorcycle as well as the contraband brown sugar from the possession of the present petitioner in presence of independent witnesses and apprehended the accused person. Hence, the case.

¶22

5. Pursuant to the order dated 02.05.2026, a comprehensive affidavit has been filed on the same day disclosing therein that the petitioner is involved in one case and in the said case this Court while allowing his bail plea on 04.03.2025 in BLAPL No. 1487 of 2025 admitted him to regular bail. The petitioner is in custody since 08.09.2025 and charge sheet has already been filed on 06.11.2025.

¶23

Page 2 of 4

¶24

6. Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is only 29 grms of brown sugar alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner, which is less than the commercial quantity and the petitioner has already incarcerated for a period of eight months, he is entitled to grant of bail.

¶25

7. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶26

8. Regard being had to the nature of evidence borne on record, the period of custody of the petitioner since 08.09.2025, I am inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶27

9. 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:

¶28

(i) Owing to the antecedent of the petitioner, he shall physically appear before the IIC concerned of the P.S. between 10.00 A.M. to 1.00 P.M. on every Sunday for at least three months;

¶29

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

¶30

(iii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each date on which the case is posted for trial, in the event of his absence the trial court shall issue coercive process to ensure his presence and the concession granted by this court shall be withdrawn;

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

Page 3 of 4

¶34

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

¶35

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.

¶36

10. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶37

Ashok

¶38

(S.S. Mishra) Judge

¶39

Signature Not Verified

¶40

Digitally Signed Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 19-May-2026 20:19:32

¶41

Page 4 of 4

Dibakar Nayak @ D.K. v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dibakar Nayak @ D.K. 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

M.S.Srinivas Vs Krushna Ch.Prusty

Guptadas Kanthia Vs Surya N.Panda

Akula Venkateswar Rao Vs M/S.Sandeep Traders

Sankardas Majhi @ Sankar Das Majhi Vs State of Odisha

Siba Sankar Patra Vs State of Odisha

Manamohan Mohanty Vs State of Odisha