Shiba Haripal @ Sukru Haripal Vs State of Odisha

This is the 2^nd bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Kantamal P.S. Case No.111 of 2021 corresponding to Special NDPS Case No.46 of 2021(A) pending in the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Kantamal, for commission of offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of NDPS Act, on the allegation of transporting 221 Kgs 500Grams of Contraband Ganja.

¶15

The surrender certificate of the petitioner filed by Mr. Amitav Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner is taken on record. Heard, Mr. Amitav Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.B.Mishra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the present matter and perused the record. On being

¶16

Page 1 of 4

¶17

queried about the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, Mr. Tripathy 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.

¶18

It is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner was not apprehended from the spot at the time of detection, but he was subsequently apprehended and arrested on 20.08.2025. Further, the petitioner has been implicated in this case on the basis of statement of co-accused and P.W.1(Premananda Nag), who has become hostile in the trial and stated that he do not know the accused. Now, the trial has commenced, but the petitioner having been granted interim bail has not misused the liberty so granted to him by surrendering to the custody. Admittedly, the quantity of Contraband Ganja seized in this case is commercial in nature and the provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act may ordinarily be attracted, but taking into consideration the evidence available on record and the manner of implication of the petitioner on the basis of statement of co-accused and P.W.1, who is found to have not supported the prosecution case, it can be said that the petitioner has satisfied the conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act.

¶19

For the reason stated hereinabove and taking into account the mode and manner of implication of the present petitioner and the law laid down by the Apex

¶20

Page 2 of 4

¶21

Court in Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamilnadu; (2020) 80 OCR (SC) 641 , so also in Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh; 2024 Live Law (SC) 416 , this Court without expressing any view on merits, admits the petitioner to bail.

¶22

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) only with two solvent sureties each 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 with following conditions:-

¶23

(i) the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail,

¶24

(ii) the petitioner in the course of trial shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless his attendance is dispensed with. In case the Petitioner fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioner for offence U/S.229-A of IPC in accordance with law,

¶25

(iii) the petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case by intimating his present address of stay and

¶26

(iv) the petitioner shall report attendance before the jurisdictional Police Station once in a fortnight preferably on 2^nd Sunday of each month in between 10 A.M. to 12 Noon for six(06) months from the actual date of his release from the

¶27

Page 3 of 4

¶28

custody or disposal of the case which ever is earlier.

¶29

The I.I.C. of Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the petitioner unnecessarily after recording his attendance beyond the time as stipulated.

¶30

It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the petitioner in future for any offence under NDPS Act on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case.

¶31

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.

¶32

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.

¶33

(G. Satapathy) Judge

¶34

Signature Not Verified

¶35

Digitally Signed Signed by: KISHORE KUMAR SAHOO kishore Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 09-Feb-2026 14:38:42

¶36

Page 4 of 4

Shiba Haripal @ Sukru Haripal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiba Haripal @ Sukru Haripal 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

Rabindra Behera @ Bikuna @ Nikuna Vs State of Odisha

Raju Dandia Vs State of Odisha

Jitendriya Banchhor @ Dhana Vs State of Odisha

Area Manager, Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd.,Bbsr Vs Sushama Sahu

Sankar Mandal Vs Sanjaya Gahan

Nirmal Sahoo@Sahu Vs State of Odisha