JUSTICE v. NARASINGH ORDER
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.10805 of 2024 Rintu @ Sanjit Sahu …. Petitioner Mr. B. Das, Advocate -versus- State of Orissa …. Opposite Party Mr. S. Panda, A.S.C. BLAPL No.10678 of 2024 Samuna @ Soumya Ranjan Bhoi …. Petitioner
Legal Reasoning
Mr. S. Mohanty, Advocate -versus- State of Orissa …. Opposite Party Mr. S. Panda, A.S.C. CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
Decision
ORDER 26.11.2024 Order No. 03. 1. Since both the matters arise out of Jagatsinghpur P.S. Case No.351 of 2023, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order on the consent of the parties. 2. The Petitioners are accused in connection with C.T. Case No.139 of 2023 pending on the file of learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge-Cum- Page 1 of 6 Special Judge, Jagatsinghpur, arising out of Jagatsinghpur P.S. Case No.351 of 2023 for commission of offence alleged under Sections-21(C) and 29 of the NDPS Act. 3. Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPLs, no other bail application of the Petitioners relating to the aforementioned P.S. Case is pending in any other Court. 4. Being aggrieved by the rejection of their application for bail U/s.483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jagatsinghpur i/c by order dated 20.09.2024 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPLs have been filed. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner in BLAPL No.10805 of 2024 (Rintu @ Sanjit Sahu) is in custody since 27.05.2023 on the allegation that he along with other accused are involved in transportation of contraband (brown sugar) to the tune of 321.62 grams. 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner in BLAPL No.10805 of 2024 (Rintu @ Sanjit Sahu), is similarly circumstanced with the co-accused (Debuli @ Debendra Sahu) since released on bail by order dated 18.11.2024 in BLAPL No.5548 of 2024. Hence, on the ground of parity, the Petitioner seeks release. Page 2 of 6 7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner in BLAPL No.10678 of 2024 (Samuna @ Soumya Ranjan Bhoi) submits that he is in custody since 28.05.2023 and is on a better footing than both the accused persons, as it is alleged by the prosecution that the contraband was procured at his instance. He also relies on the order of the co-accused adverted to hereinabove and on the ground of parity, he seeks release. And, in this context he relies on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Tofan Singh vrs. State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2020) 80 OCR (SC) 641 and the State of Haryana vrs. Samarth Kumar reported in 2022 Live Law (SC) 622. 8. Both the learned counsel rely on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vrs. Central Bureau of Investigation & another, reported in 2022(10) SCC 51 relating to parity which is extracted hereunder, the foundations of “Uniformity and certainty in the decisions of judicial the court are dispensation. Persons accused with the same offence shall never be treated differently either by the same court or by the same or different courts. Such an action though by an exercise of discretion despite being a judicial one would be a grave affront to Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India.” (Paragraph-98) 9. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer in view of the bar contained in Section Page 3 of 6 37(1)(b)(ii) of the N.D.P.S Act and the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of State by the Inspector of Police vs. B. Ramu in SLP(Crl.) No(s).8137 of 2022 dated 12.02.2024 and in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Kajad reported in (2001) 7 SCC 673. 10. This Court by order dated 18.11.2024 while granting bail to the co-accused in BLAPL No.5548 of 2024 took note of the procrastination of trial and the delay in the submission of the C.E report. For brevity the paragraphs of the said order are culled out hereunder: “XXX XXX XXX 12. Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner regarding non-progress in trial, a report was called for from the learned Court in seisin. The said report reads as under; “xxx xxx xxx On 30.11.2023 the case record was received on transfer by this Court at the stage of consideration of charge. - Due to want of C.E. report charge could not be framed till 16.04.2024 which is despite several correspondences to the I.O. for submission of C.E. report. On 16.04.2024 the charge was framed without C.E. report fixing 17.05.2024 for evidence and summons were issued according. On 17.05.2024 on the prayer for adjournment of IIC, Tirtol Page 4 of 6 P.S., the case is posted to 28.06.2024 for evidence. Summons stands issued accordingly. xxx xxx xxx” 13. Referring to the final form, which is on record, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the prosecution has cited 26 witnesses and as such the trial is likely to linger. And, it is further submitted that the Petitioner is aged about 62 years and as he is the first offender, he may be released on bail. XXX XXX XXX” 11. The memo filed by the learned counsel in BLAPL No.10678 of 2024(Samuna @ Soumya Ranjan Bhoi) indicating the criminal antecedents of the Petitioner (Samuna @ Soumya Ranjan Bhoi) is taken on record. The criminal antecedent runs thus: i. Jagatsinghpur P.S. Case No.630 of 2022, Under Section-21(b)/29(1) of NDPS Act. 12. Taking into account the release of the co- accused and period in custody, this Court directs the Petitioners to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned court in seisin. 13. It is apt to note here that an affidavit has been filed by the I.O. before this Court, which is on record indicating that the Petitioner in BLAPL No.10805 of 2024 (Rintu @ Sanjit Sahu) is the first offender. 14. Be that as it may, before releasing, learned Court in seisin is requested to verify as to whether Page 5 of 6 Petitioner in BLAPL No.10805 of 2024 (Rintu @ Sanjit Sahu) is the first offender as asserted. If it comes to fore that such submission made at the Bar is found to be incorrect, this order shall not be given effect to qua the Petitioner in BLAPL No.10805 of 2024 (Rintu @ Sanjit Sahu). 15. The learned Court in seisin is also requested to verify as to whether the Petitioner in BLAPL No.10678 of 2024(Samuna @ Soumya Ranjan Bhoi) has any other criminal antecedent than noted in the preceding paragraph. If it comes to fore that the Petitioner (Samuna @ Soumya Ranjan Bhoi) has any other criminal antecedent than as noted, this order shall not be given effect to. 16. Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioners shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once every two months on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin till conclusion of trial. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin. 17. Accordingly, the BLAPLs stand disposed of. 18. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per the rules. (V. NARASINGH) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Soumya Signed by: SOUMYA RANJAN SAMAL Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 27-Nov-2024 21:00:17 Judge Page 6 of 6