The High Court
Case Details
Order No. 01. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.1944 of 2025 Philip Digal ..…... Petitioner -Versus- Mr. A. P. Bose, Adv. State of Odisha ………. Opposite Party Mr. Pradipta Satpathy, ASC CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
Decision
ORDER 13.05.2025 Dated Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name Sections FIR/ PR No. Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act 0319 28.05.2024 Gangapur G.R. Case No.10 2024(N) of arising out of P.S. Gangapur Case No.319 of 2024 pending in of court the learned Special Judge-cum- Additional Sessions Aska, Ganjam Judge, 2 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Parties. 3. The petitioner is in custody in connection with G.R. Case No.10 of 2024(N) arising out of Gangapur P.S. Case No.319 of 2024 pending in the court of learned Special Judge-cum- Additional Sessions Judge, Aska, Ganjam, has filed the present application seeking release on bail. The case has been registered for alleged offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 4. The prosecution story in brief is that on 28.05.2024 at about 7.30 A.M, while the S.I. of Police namely Ajaya Kumar Mallik and staff of Gangapur Police Station were on duty, found a car bearing Registration No.OD-02-BQ-0769 met with an accident. But, the driver and its occupants were not sustained any injury. On search of said car, they recovered two plastic gunny bags, one containing 43 kgs and another 29 kgs 500 grams, in total 72 kg 500 grams. On Demand, the driver and the occupants failed to produce any license or authority in support of illegal and conscious possession of the contraband ganja. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had no knowledge of the transportation of the contraband Page 2 of 6 3 ganja. It is contended that the petitioner has no connection whatsoever with the alleged offences as claimed by the prosecution. Furthermore, the petitioner has been in custody since 29.05.2024 and the charge sheet has already been filed on 21.11.2024. Accordingly, it is prayed that the Petitioner be released on bail. 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that the prolonged incarceration suffered by the petitioner entitles him to be considered for the grant of bail. It is argued that the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right guaranteed to every under trial prisoner under Article 21 of the Constitution. This principle has been repeatedly affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, including in the case of Kadra Pahadiya & Ors. v. State of Bihar1, wherein it was held that the State and, where applicable, the complainant have an obligation to ensure that criminal proceedings are conducted with reasonable promptitude. In a country like India, where a significant portion of the accused belong to economically and socially weaker sections of society and often lack access to competent legal assistance, the burden of delay should not be unjustly borne by the accused. While a specific demand for a speedy trial by the 1 (1981) 3 SCC 671. Page 3 of 6 4 accused may strengthen the plea, the absence of such a demand does not disentitle the accused from asserting a violation of this right. 7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner also relies on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi)2, wherein the Court emphasized that incarceration has particularly harsh and far-reaching consequences for individuals from the weakest economic strata. It leads to immediate loss of livelihood, disruption of family structures, and social alienation. The Court observed that, in such circumstances, prolonged pre-trial detention inflicts irreparable harm—especially if the accused is ultimately acquitted. Therefore, the judiciary must remain sensitive to these consequences and ensure that trials, particularly those arising under special statutes with stringent provisions, are prioritized and concluded expeditiously. 8. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail contending that the quantity of contraband ganja seized is greater than commercial quantity weighing 72 kg 500 grams. In such premises, he submits that the Petitioner does not deserve for bail. 2 SLP (Crl.) No.915 of 2023. Page 4 of 6 5 9. Without entering into the merits of the case, and considering the facts and circumstances as well as the duration of the petitioner’s custody, this Court is of the view that the petitioner should be granted bail by the learned court in seisin over the matter. However, such release shall be conditioned upon stringent terms and conditions, as the learned court deems fit and just. The conditions are as follows:- i. The petitioner shall appear before the trial court on each date of posting of the case. ii. The petitioner shall not indulge himself in any criminal offence while on bail. iii. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses in any manner. iv. The Petitioner, after the onset of monsoon, shall plant 300 saplings each of local varieties, such as mango, neem, tamarind, etc., around his village on Government land, community land, or private land in the possession of the Petitioner or his family members. In the event that suitable land is unavailable, the Revenue Authority shall assist in identifying the land for plantation. Violation of any of the above conditions shall lead to cancellation of the bail. Page 5 of 6 6 8. The District Nursery/D.F.O. shall extend the helping hand by supplying the saplings to the Petitioner and the Revenue Authority shall assist the Petitioner in identifying the location for plantation of the saplings. If the land is not available, the Petitioner to approach the Revenue Authority for identifying the land for plantation and the Revenue Authority shall do the needful. 9. The I.I.C. of the concerned Police Station in coordination with the local Forest Officer shall monitor; whether the Petitioner has planted the saplings or not. 10. It is further made clear that the Petitioner shall file an affidavit after plantation of the saplings before the local Police Station assuring that he shall maintain those plants for two years. Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail. 11. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. Judge (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Sumitra Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMITRA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 28-May-2025 12:57:00 Page 6 of 6