The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.5539 of 2024 Kumar Rana The State of Odisha …. Petitioner Mr. Jugal Kishore Panda, Adv. -versus- …. Opposite Party Mr. Tapas Kumar Praharaj, ASC CORAM: DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
Decision
Order No. ORDER 06.06.2024 Sections Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act. Dated F.I.R. No. 0267 26.07.2023 Boudh Special Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name Case (NDPS) No.112 of 2023 arising out of Boudh P.S. Case No.267 dated 26.07.2023 pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge- cum-Special Judge, Boudh 01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Jun-2024 15:26:01 3. The Petitioner being in custody in connection with Special Case (NDPS) No.112 of 2023 arising out of Boudh Page 1 of 5 P.S. Case No.267 dated 26.07.2023 pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Boudh, registered for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, has filed this petition for his release on bail. 4. The allegation as made in the F.I.R. reveals that contraband ganja weighing 405 kgs. was being transported in the vehicle, when it was apprehended by Police. The driver of the vehicle is said to have fled and the helper/the present Petitioner was nabbed. The Petitioner was, accordingly, arrested. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing has been seized from the possession of the present Petitioner. He is in custody since 26.07.2023. He also submits that the co-accused persons, who stand on similar footing, have already been released on bail vide orders dated 24.01.2024 and dated 10.04.2024 passed in ABLAPL No.14667 of 2023 and ABLAPL No.1931 of 2024 respectively. He further contends that the trial has not yet commenced. 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contends that Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Jun-2024 15:26:01 the Supreme Court has held that right to have speedy trial is a fundamental right of a citizen. Hence, keeping a Page 2 of 5 person in custody for such a long time without any trial is not justified and violative of his fundamental right. The importance of speedy trial has been emphasized in the case of Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. vrs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar 1, wherein the Supreme Court has iterated that: "Speedy trial is, as held by us in our earlier judgment dated 26th February, 1979, an essential ingredient of ’reasonable, fair and just" procedure guaranteed by Article 21 and it is the constitutional obligation of the State to device such a procedure as would ensure speedy trial to the accused. The State cannot be permitted to deny the constitutional right of speedy trial to the accused on the ground that the State has no adequate financial resources to incur the necessary expenditure needed for improving the administrative and judicial apparatus with a view to ensuring speedy trial." 7. He further argues that the period of long incarceration suffered, which entitles the Petitioner for grant of bail. Right to Speedy trial is a fundamental right of an under trial prisoner and this observations have been resonated, time and again, in several judgments including that of Kadra Pahadiya & Ors. v. State of Bihar2 wherein it has been stated that the obligation of the State or the complainant, as the case may be, to proceed with the case with reasonable promptitude. Particularly, in a country like ours, where the large majority of the accused come from poorer and weaker sections of the society and are not Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Jun-2024 15:26:01 1 1979 AIR 1360 2 (1981) 3 SCC 671 Page 3 of 5 versed with laws and after face the dearth of competent legal advice, the application of the said NDPS Rule is wholly inadvisable. Of course, in a given case, if an accused demands speedy trial and yet he is not given one, may be a relevant factor in his favour. But an accused cannot be disentitled from complaining of infringement of his right to speedy trial on the ground that he did not ask for or insist upon a speedy trial. 8. The Supreme Court has also held in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi)3 that incarceration has further deleterious effects where the accused belongs to the weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the event of an acquittal, the loss to the accused is irreparable), and ensure that trials - especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily. 9. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the bail prayer of the Petitioner. 10. Without going into the merits of the case and considering the submissions made by the learned counsel Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Jun-2024 15:26:01 3 SLP (Crl.) No. 915 of 2023 Page 4 of 5 for the parties, this Court directs the court in seisin over the matter to release the Petitioner on bail in the aforesaid case on some stringent terms and conditions with further conditions that: i. ii. iii. iv. the Petitioner shall plant 50 saplings of local like mango, neem, tamarind etc. variety around his village over the Government land/community land/private land, if it is in the possession of the Petitioner. the Petitioner shall appear before the court in seisin over the matter on each date of posting of the case till completion of trial; the Petitioner shall not indulge himself in any criminal activities in future; the Petitioner shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in any manner; Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail. 11. The I.I.C of the concerned Police Station shall see; whether the Petitioner has planted the saplings or not. 12. The District Nursery/D.F.O shall extend the helping hand by supplying the saplings to the Petitioner. 13. The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of. Vacation Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Ayaskanta Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Jun-2024 15:26:01 (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Page 5 of 5