Allowed

Reetu Meena v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Sept 2026BLAPL/7051/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bench allowed two bail applications filed under Section 483 of the BNSS by persons charged with transporting ganja under the NDPS Act. Release was granted subject to verification of criminal antecedents and furnishing bail bonds.

What did the court decide?

Each petitioner granted bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties each, subject to verification of criminal antecedents.

Reetu Meena Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

Reetu Meena (In BLAPL No.7051 of 2026) CNR No. ODHC010502622026 Vikas Kaithwas

¶3

(In BLAPL No.7219 of 2026) CNR No. ODHC010522212026 … Petitioners

¶4

Mr. R.L. Pattanaik, proxy counsel on behalf of Mr. S.K. Panda, Advocate (in BLAPL No.7051 of 2026) Mr. S. Sahoo, Advocate (in BLAPL No.7219 of 2026)

-versus-

Order No.

01.

State of Orissa

¶9

… Opposite Party Mr. M.R. Patra, Addl. PP

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL) 09.09.2026

¶11

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

¶12

Since these two bail applications arise out of one and same case record, the same are heard together and disposed of by this common order with the consent of the learned counsels for the parties.

¶13

These are bail applications U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Adava PS Case No.194 of 2025 corresponding to GR Case No.100 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Spl. Judge, Gajapati for commission of offence punishable U/Ss.20(b)(ii)(C)/25/29 of the NDPS Act, on the main allegation of transporting 25Kgs and 900Grams of Contraband Ganja in a Tata Indigo Car bearing Regd. No.MP13-CA-7758.

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

Heard, Mr. Rajib Lochan Pattanaik, learned proxy counsel appearing virtually on behalf of Mr. Sunil Kumar Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No.7051 of 2026; Mr. Satyabrata Sahoo, learned counsel appearing virtually for the petitioner in BLAPL No.7219 of 2026 and Mr. M.R. Patra, learned Addl. PP in these matters and perused the record. On being queried about the criminal antecedent of the petitioners, Mr. Pattanaik & Mr. Sahoo, learned counsels for the respective petitioners volunteer to withhold bail to the petitioner(s), if he/they is/are having any criminal antecedent of similar nature for commission of offence under NDPS Act.

¶16

Admittedly, the petitioners were taken into custody on 20.12.2025, but in the meantime, charge-sheet has already been submitted, however, the trial is yet to commence and there are 17 charge-sheeted witnesses and, therefore, the trial would take some time. Besides, it is claimed that the petitioners are not having any criminal antecedent of similar nature. In the peculiar facts and circumstance of the case and ongoing through the materials placed on record together with the claim of the Petitioners for not having any criminal antecedent of similar nature, the petitioners would be considered to have satisfied the conditions of Sec.37 of NDPS Act, if they are not having any criminal antecedent of similar nature for commission of offence under NDPS Act.

¶17

For the reason stated hereinabove and taking into account the custody period of the petitioner with submission of charge-sheet in the meantime and keeping in view the other circumstances on record in entirety, this Court without

¶18

Page 2 of 3

¶19

expressing any view on merit admits each of the petitioners to bail, but subject to verification of their criminal antecedent.

¶20

Hence, these two bail applications of the petitioners namely Reetu Meena (BLAPL No.7051 of 2026) and Vikas Kaithwas (BLAPL No.7219 of 2026) stand allowed and each of the petitioners are allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) 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.

¶21

In view of the specific submission as advanced for the petitioners, the benefit of this order shall not be extended to the concerned petitioner(s), if he/they is/are found to have any criminal antecedent of similar nature for commission of offences under NDPS Act.

¶22

Accordingly, these BLAPLs stand disposed of. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. A soft copy of this order be immediately communicated to the concerned Court, who shall afterwards communicate the same to the concerned Jail through e-mail for reference.

¶23

(G. Satapathy) Judge

¶24

Jayakrushna

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: JAYAKRUSHNA DASH Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 09-Sep-2026 19:40:01

¶27

Page 3 of 3

Reetu Meena v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reetu Meena v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases