Prasant Sahoo v. State Of Odisha

Represented By Adv. – Mr. Amlan Shakti Paul Opposite Party Represented By Adv. – Mr. M.R. Mohanty, AGA CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 20.01.2025

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

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the Opposite Party-State.

This is an application under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., 2023 filed by the Petitioner for pre-arrest bail.

The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with T.R. Case No.107 of 2024, arising out of Industrial Estate P.S. Case No.254 of 2024, pending in the court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge under NDPS Act, Khordha, for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 21(b)/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. Page 1 of 3.

It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner has been implicated in this case on the basis of the co-accused statement. He further contended that nothing has been recovered from the exclusive and conscious possession of the present Petitioner, therefore, the bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act would not be attracted to the facts of the present case. Further, referring to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tofan Singh v. The State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2013) 16 SCC 31, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the statement of the co-accused cannot be accepted as evidence, so far the present Petitioner is concerned. He further contended that the Petitioner belongs to the locality, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding.

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposed the release of the Petitioner on pre-arrest bail on the ground of gravity and seriousness of the allegation. He further submitted that investigation is still on. Therefore, the release of the Petitioner on pre-arrest bail at this juncture would cause adverse impact on the on-going investigation.

Taking into consideration the aforesaid submission, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner. However, it is directed that in the event the Petitioner surrenders before the Court in seisin over the matter within a period of four weeks from today and moves an application for bail, the Court in seisin over the mater shall consider and dispose of the bail application of the Petitioner in accordance with law on the same day. While Page 2 of 3. considering the bail application of the Petitioner, the Court in seisin over the matter shall also keep in view the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh v. The State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2013) 16 SCC 31; and order dated

10.01.2022 in the matter of State by (NCB) Bengaluru Vs. Pallulabid Ahmad Arimuta and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.242 of 2022) and shall also take into consideration the fact that the bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act would not be attracted to the facts of the present case and pass necessary order.

The Case Diary be made available to the concerned court to facilitate disposal of the bail application of the Petitioner.

Accordingly, the ABLAPL is disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge Debasis Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 21-Jan-2025 18:21:00 Page 3 of 3.