The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.12517 of 2022 Petitioner Anil Yadav Mr. R. L. Pattnaik, Advocate …. State of Odisha -versus- …. Opposite Party Mr.G.R.Mohapatra,ASC. CORAM: DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI Order No. Dated Police Station F.I.R. No. 0021 31.01.2021 Boipariguda
Decision
ORDER 14.09.2023 Case No. and Courts’ Name T.R. case No. 07 of 2021 pending in the court of learned District & Sessions Judge- cum- Special Judge, Koraput at Jeypore Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act. Page 1 of 6 // 2 // 03. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 3. The petitioner being in custody in connection with Boipariguda P.S. case No.21 of 2021 corresponding to T.R. case No.07 of 2021 pending in the court of the learned District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Koraput at Jeypore, registered for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act has filed this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for his release on bail. 4. The brief fact of the case is that on 31.01.2021while the Police personnel of Boipariguda Police station being led by a Sub Inspector were discharging patrolling duty and M.V. checking duty at about 11.45 a.m., they noticed a white colour vehicle viz. TATA Xenon Yodha+ pick up bearing registration no.OD-10-E-6545 -3095 coming from Tanginiguda side towards Boipariguda. Seeing the police personnel the vehicle took a sudden turn and started fleeing with high speed. On suspicion, the police officials detained the vehicle and recovered 8 numbers of polythene packets on its back side carrier (dala), from which acute smell of ganja was coming out. The Police Page 2 of 6 // 3 // officials seized 193 Kgs of contraband ‘ganja’ after observing all formalities of search and seizure. Thereafter, the informant has registered the case against the petitioner and other accused. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is in custody since 31.01.2021. In the event of his release on bail, he shall abide by any terms and conditions as fixed by the Court.. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the present petitioner has already spent in custody since 31.01.2021which is more than two years. 7. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the bail prayer of the petitioner with the submission that the petitioner belongs to outside Orissa. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that right to have speedy trial is a fundamental right of a citizen. Hence, keeping a 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. vs Home Secretary, Page 3 of 6 // 4 // State of Bihar, wherein the Hon'ble 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." 9. He further argues that the period of long incarceration suffered, which entitle 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 Bihar1 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 versed with laws and after face the dearth of competent 1 1981)3 SCC 671 Page 4 of 6 // 5 // 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. 10. The Supreme Court has also held in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi)2 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. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances put forth as well as period of detention, it is directed that let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case by furnishing cash security/property security of Rs. 2,00,000/- 2 SLP (Crl.) No. 915 of 2023 Page 5 of 6 // 6 // (Rupees two lakhs) with two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter with further conditions that i) he shall appear before the court below on each date of posting of the case; ii) he shall not indulge himself in any criminal offence while on bail and iii) he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. . 12. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. 13. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. Judge (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Sumitra Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMITRA NAYAK Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa HIgh Court, Cuttack Date: 16-Sep-2023 15:13:05 Page 6 of 6