Dipun Sahu @ Dipankar Sahu State of Odisha … v. …
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 4546 of 2024 Dipun Sahu @ Dipankar Sahu State of Odisha ….. Vs. ….. Petitioner Mr. Bikas Swain, Advocate Opp. Party Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, A.S.C. CORAM: JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO Order No. 08. ORDER 07.03.2025 (Through hybrid mode) 1. This is the second application of the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in this Court for grant of bail to the petitioner in connection with Puintala P.S. Case No. 199 of 2023 corresponding to Special G.R. Case No. 74 of 2023 pending in the Court of the learned Special Judge, Balangir where Charge sheet in this case had been filed on 26.02.2024 against Chitta @ Chitta Ranjan Sahoo, Sitakanta Dang, Dipan Sahu @ Dipankar Sahu (present petitioner) and Bijay Kumar Sahoo under Sections 20 (b)(ii)(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, keeping investigation open. 2. BLAPL No. 14063 of 2023 filed earlier by the petitioner
Decision
had been disposed of on 15.12.2023 granting him interim bail for a period of two weeks to enable him to appear in the 5th Semester Civil Engineering examination. Page 1 of 8 3. The prayer for bail of the petitioner and co-accused Chitta @ Chitta Ranjan Sahu and Sitakanta Dang have been rejected on 03.05.2024 by the learned 1st Additional District & Sessions Judge, Balangir. 4. The prosecution allegation is that on 09.09.2023 at about 6.24 a.m., the S.I. and other staffs of Puintala Police Station were performing MV checking on NH-57 in Puintala Police Station area from Bairasar to Puintala. During course of their patrolling, they detected two vehicles a Mahindra XUV vehicle bearing Regd. No. OD-03-W-4474 and a Pick-up van bearing Regd. No. OD-03-Z- 4531 speeding from Bairasar side towards Bolangir. Despite signals to stop, the vehicles continued until they were intercepted near Giri Gobardhan temple at 7.30 A.M. The Pick-up van contained 7 plastic gunny bags, emitting smell of ganja. Two persons were sitting in the Pick-up vehicle, i.e. the driver and another person. The present petitioner was in the Mahindra XUV. They gave their identity as Chitta @ Chitta Ranjan Sahu, Sitakanta Dang and Dipun @ Dipankar Sahu. They confessed that they were transporting ganja for business purpose to Raipur. In presence of the Executive Magistrate and other witnesses, search and seizure was done. Seven numbers of white/green colour gunny bags containing Ganja packets were Page 2 of 8 recovered from the Pick-up van. The total weight of Ganja seized came to 217 kgs. As the three accused persons could not produce any license or authority for possessing the same, they were arrested. During investigation, it was ascertained that one Bijay Sahu was in regular contact with the three accused persons and aided them in loading transportation of ganja. He was arrested in connection with Balangir Town P.S. Case No. 505 of 2023 and he was remanded in this case. 5. Mr. Bikas Swain, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that nothing has been seized from the petitioner, who was the occupant of Mahindra XUV Vehicle or from the vehicle. The petitioner does not have similar criminal antecedents and is a student of Sushree Institute of Technical Education (SITE), Sadeipali, Balangir, where he is pursuing Diploma Engineering in Civil Branch and is in custody since 09.09.2023. He is being exposed to hardened criminals in jail. He has further submitted that the petitioner has not misused the liberty granted to him earlier and after completion of the period of interim bail, the petitioner has surrendered in time before the learned Court below and that co accused Bijay Kumar Sahoo has been granted bail by this Court. 6. Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, learned Additional Standing Counsel Page 3 of 8 for the State has opposed the prayer for bail stating that the petitioner has three criminal antecedents, namely, Balangir Town P.S. Case No.405 of 2022, Tarava P.S. Case No.177 of 2017 and Tarava P.S. Case No.270 of 2021. He has further submitted that commercial quantity of ganja has been seized from the petitioner and the two accused, who were transporting the ganja without valid documents. Although no ganja was seized from the Mahindra XUV vehicle, but the petitioner in connivance with the two co accused persons in the Pick-up van was transporting the ganja and all three of them tried to escape when the police signaled them to stop. In view of the quantity of ganja seized and the conduct of the petitioner, Section 37 of the NDPS Act will be a bar for releasing him on bail. The prayer for bail of Chitta @ Chitta Ranjan Sahoo and Sitakanta Dang who stand on similar footing as the petitioner as they were arrested at the spot, has been rejected by this Court. Co-accused Bijay Kumar Sahoo who has been granted bail stands on a different footing, as he was not arrested at the spot. 7. RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE NDPS ACT. Section 37- Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable. – (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), (a) every offence punishable under this Act shall be Page 4 of 8 cognizable; (b) no person accused of an offence punishable for 1[offences under section 19 or section 24 or section 27A and also for offences involving commercial quantity] shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless- (i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release, and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. (2) The limitations on granting of bail specified in clause (b) of sub-section (1) are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bail. 8. In view of the quantity of ganja seized, the circumstances in which it was seized, the conduct of the petitioner, rejection of prayer for bail of the two co accused - Sitakanta Dang in BLAPL No.3626 of 2024 on 19.07.2024 and Chitta @ Chitta Ranjan Sahoo in BLAPL No.8543 of 2024 on 11.12.2024 and in view of the requirements of Section – 37 of the NDPS Act which are not satisfied, I am not inclined to allow the prayer for bail. 9. In view of the punishment prescribed for the offence the petitioner is accused of committing and the period spent by him in Page 5 of 8 custody, I am also not satisfied that he should be released on bail on the ground of violation of Article 21 of the Constitution and right to speedy trial. 10. The prayer for bail is accordingly rejected. 11. While rejecting the prayer for bail, keeping in mind the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 09.09.2023, and keeping in mind the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Athar Pervez vs. State : 2016 SCC OnLine Del 6662 and the Supreme Court in the case of Arvind Kejriwal vs. Directorate of Enforcement : (2024) 9 SCC 577 on grant of interim bail, I am inclined to direct for release of the petitioner on interim bail for a period of three months. 12. The petitioner Dipun Sahu @ Dipankar Sahu shall be released on interim bail for a period of three months by the learned Court below in seisin over the matter in connection with the aforesaid case, on such terms and conditions as deemed fit and proper, including the following conditions:- (i) He shall furnish cash surety of Rs.20,000/-. (ii) He shall not leave Balangir District, without permission of the learned trial Court. (iii) He shall furnish his local address and permanent address to the Court, which will be verified through the Police, before Page 6 of 8 he is released on bail. (iv) He shall furnish his active mobile number to the Court, which shall be verified, before he is released on bail. He shall intimate any change in his mobile number to his counsel immediately, so that it can be intimated to the Court. (v) He shall remain personally present in the learned trial court on each date it is fixed for trial. (vi) He shall appear before the Puintala Police Station on every alternate Sunday between 10.00 am to 11.00 a.m. unless permitted by the learned trial court to leave Balangir District. 13. Violation of any condition will entail in cancellation of bail / recall of this order. 14. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. 15. In BLAPL No.8543 of 2024 while rejecting the prayer for bail of co-accused- Chitta @ Chitta Ranjan Sahoo), the learned trial court had been requested to make an endeavour to complete the trial by the end of April, 2025, if there is no other impediment. So further direction is not necessary. 16. It is open to the petitioner to move the learned trial Court for bail afresh after his surrender, in case trial has not been concluded by then. Page 7 of 8 17. Copy of this order shall be supplied to Ms. Sarita Maharana, learned Additional Standing Counsel for onward transmission to the IIC, Puintala Police Station. 18. No observation in this order should influence the learned trial court which is to decide the case strictly on basis of evidence recoded during the trial, as the observations have been made solely for the purpose of consideration of the prayer for bail. Sukanta (Savitri Ratho) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUKANTA KUMAR BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 13-Mar-2025 19:36:26 Page 8 of 8