The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Arun Kumar Rana (In BLAPL No.8814 of 2024) Subudhi Sahu (In BLAPL No.8867 of 2024 along with I.A. No. 309 of 2025) Ritu Barik @ Ramakanta Barik (In BLAPL No.8872 of 2024) Swadhin Khatua (In BLAPL No.8951 of 2024) Sadasan Barik (In BLAPL No.9504 of 2024) Sramika Sahu (In BLAPL No.10245 of 2024) Alok Kumar Patra (In BLAPL No.10486 of 2024) … Petitioners Mr. S.K. Sarangi, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. S. Moharana, Advocate (in all the bail applications except in BLAPL No.10245 of 2024) Mr. S. Mishra, Advocate (in BLAPL No.10245 of 2024) -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. M.K. Mohanty, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL) 02.05.2025 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. On being prayed, I.A. No.309 of 2025 arising out of BLAPL No.8867 of 2024 stands disposed of as not pressed. Page 1 of 5 Order No. 06. 3. Since all these seven bail applications arise out of one and same case record, the same are heard together
Decision
and disposed of by this common order with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 4. This is an application U/S.483 BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Gochhapada PS Case No.134 of 2024 arising out of CT(N) Case No.132 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, Phulbani, for commission of offences punishable U/S. 20(b) (ii) (C), 25/29 of the NDPS Act, r/w Section 25 & 27 of Arms Act, on the allegation of transporting 400 Kgs of Contraband Ganja in the Creta car bearing Regd. No.OD-02-AK-8080 along with seven motorcycles. 5. In the course of hearing, Mr. Santanu Kumar Sarangi, learned Senior Counsel, who is being assisted by Mr. Saroj Moharana, learned counsel for the Petitioners in all the bail applications except BLAPL No.10245 of 2024 submits that although there is allegation of seizure of 400 Kgs of Contraband Ganja in this case, but the Contraband articles can only be found to have been recovered from each of the Petitioners separately and thereby, even if the prosecution materials are taken into consideration, it can only be considered that each of the Petitioners would be having 25 Kgs of Contraband articles and the persons who were travelling in Creta car can be considered to be transporting 50 Kgs of Contraband Ganja, but fact remains that the Petitioners have already been detained in custody for a substantial period and thereby, in the Page 2 of 5 circumstance, the bar as provided in Section 37 of NDPS Act would not be applicable for grant of bail to the Petitioners. It is further submitted by Mr. Sarangi that there are not only these 7 persons, but also some more persons were coming in motorcycles and who had fled away from the spot and thereby, individual liability cannot mature into joint liability of all the Petitioners. It is also submitted by Mr. Sarangi that even if the prosecution materials are believed to be true, it cannot be objectively said that the persons travelling in Creta, were in fact transporting the Contraband articles and, therefore, charge-sheet having already been submitted in this case, the Petitioners may kindly be enlarged on bail. 5.1. On the other hand, Mr. Sanjit Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner in BLAPL No.10245 of 2024 submits that the Petitioner was in fact found to be travelling on the motorcycle and whether any Contraband articles has been recovered from him is a question of fact which can be gone into at the trial after full-fledged evidence being led and, therefore, the conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act would not operate as bar for grant of bail to the Petitioner. Accordingly, he prays to grant bail to the Petitioner in BLAPL No.10245 of 2024. 5.2. On the contrary, Mr. M.K. Mohanty, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor by taking this Court through the materials placed on record submits that altogether 400 Kgs of Contraband Ganja have been jointly recovered from the Petitioners and thereby, the Petitioners having not satisfied the conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act, Page 3 of 5 their bail applications cannot be considered positively. Accordingly, Mr. Mohanty, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor prays to reject the bail applications of the Petitioners. 6. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against the Petitioners for transporting 400 Kgs of Contraband Ganja, which is in fact well above the commercial quantity, but fact remains that whether the Petitioners were allegedly individually transporting the Contraband articles or jointly is a question of fact and it can only be ascertained at the trial after the evidence is being led. However, a detail and meticulous examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation on merit at the stage of consideration of bail is impermissible, but the Court has to see prima facie case at that stage. In the aforesaid circumstance and on consideration of materials placed on record, none of the Petitioners is found to have satisfied the conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act. 7. In view of the above facts and taking into consideration the material placed on record and the law laid down by Apex Court in a very recent decision in Narcotic Control Bureau Vrs. Kashif; (2024) SCC Online SC 3848; this Court does not consider it proper to grant bail to the Petitioners. 8. Hence these seven bail applications of the Petitioners namely Arun Kumar Rana in BLAPL No.8814 of 2024, Subudhi Sahu in BLAPL No.8867 of 2024, Ritu Barik @ Ramakanta Barik in BLAPL No.8872 of 2024, Swadhina Khatua in BLAPL No.8951 of 2024, Sadasan Page 4 of 5 Barik in BLAPL No.9504 of 2024, Sramika Sahu in BLAPL No.10245 of 2024 and Alok Kumar Patra in BLAPL No.10486 of 2024 stand rejected. Accordingly, these bail applications stand disposed of. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. Jayakrushna (G. Satapathy) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: JAYAKRUSHNA DASH Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 03-May-2025 16:01:30 Page 5 of 5