Narendra Naik Vs State of Odisha

The Petitioners are accused in connection with G.R. Case No.60 of 2025(N), pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Ganjam, Berhampur, arising out of Gosaninuagaon P.S. Case No.364 of 2025, for commission of alleged offences U/s 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act.

¶40

Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPLs, no other bail application of the Petitioners relating to the aforementioned P.S. Case is pending in any other Court.

¶41

Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bails U/s. 483 of the BNSS by the learned Sessions Judge-Cum-Special Judge, Ganjam, Berhampur, by order dated 06.04.2026, the present BLAPLs have been filed.

¶42

The present Petitioners were before this Court in BLAPL Nos.491, 1855, 1451 and 1343 of 2026 which was

¶43

Page 2 of 5

¶44

disposed of vide common order dated 10.03.2026 giving them liberty to renew their prayer after submission of charge sheet.

¶45

The accusation against the present Petitioners is that they were being involved in the transportation of contraband (ganja) to the tune of 30.05 kg and as charge sheet has already been filed on 25.03.2026, the Petitioners may be released on bail, inter alia, on the ground of procrastination of trial on account of nonsubmission of CE Report.

¶46

To test the veracity of such submission, a report was called for from the learned Court in seisin.

¶47

For convenience of reference, extract of the said report is extracted hereunder:-

¶48

“ In inviting a kind reference to the subject as indicated above and in obedience to the direction of the Hon'ble Court vide order No. 1 dated 05/05/2026 in BLAPL No. 3579/2026 and BLAPL No. 3943/2026, I am to submit that the case vide G.R. No.60/2025N, arising out of Gosaninuagnon P.S. case No. 364 dated 28/09/2025 under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act was instituted before this Court against four accused persons including accused persons namely, Narendra Naik and Papu Naik on 28/09/2025. In the meanwhile, charge sheet/Final Form has already been submitted on 25/03/2026. The Chemical Examination

¶49

report has not yet been produced despite repeated reminders to the 1.0. and the Deputy Director of RFSL, Berhampur. Therefore, trial in the matter could not commence. The record now stands adjourned to 25/05/2026 awaiting submission of CE. report.”

¶50

(Emphasized)

¶51

Page 3 of 5

¶52

It is submitted by the learned counsel that since the Petitioners are in custody since 28.09.2025, they may be enlarged on bail.

¶53

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail, inter alia, referring to the rigors of Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act and submits that merely because there is procrastination of trial in view of the bar contained in Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act referred to hereinabove, no leniency ought to be shown. 11. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the State have to be weighed qua the right of the Petitioners as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India for an expeditious trial keeping in view the latest dictum of the Apex Court in the case of

¶54

State of Punjab vrs. Sukhwindar Singh @ Gora, (2026) SCC OnLine 671 , wherein the Apex Court has cautioned that merely because there is delay in trial that does not ipso facto entitle an accused to be released on bail in view of the mandatory provisions contained in the NDPS Act.

¶55

Hence, the rival submissions have to be considered in the light of the latest dictum of the Apex Court as above. 12. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that the Petitioners are in their 20’s and they ordinarily stay within the jurisdiction of the Court in seisin. Hence, the same ought to weigh with this Court in considering the Petitioners for bail notwithstanding the embargo under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act since

¶56

Page 4 of 5

¶57

admittedly the CE report is not been submitted for which trial is not proceeding.

¶58

Considering the rival submissions, though the quantity of contraband involved is above the commercial quantity, and taking into account the non-submission of the Chemical Examination’s report, on account of which the trial is lingering, as well as the period of custody undergone by the Petitioners, their age, and the submission that they are first-time offenders and keeping their right in terms of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, this Court directs that the Petitioners be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the learned Court in seisin of the matter, so as to ensure their presence during trial, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents.

¶59

If it comes to the fore that the Petitioners have any criminal antecedents, this order shall not be given effect to.

¶60

Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioners shall not leave the state of Odisha for the next six months without the specific permission from the Court in seisin.

¶61