Sumant Karna @ Sumanta Ku v. Jugala Kishore Panda

Represented By Adv. – Ms. S.Nayak, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 02.01.2025

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party- State.

This is an application under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., 2023 filed by the Petitioner for pre-arrest bail.

The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Special Case No.97 of 2024 (NDPS Act), arising out of Boudh P.S. Case No.398 of 2024, pending in the court of learned Special Judge- cum-Sessions Judge, Boudh, for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 20(a)(i) of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985.

It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner has been implicated in the present case on the basis of Page 1 of 3. suspicion. He further submitted that such implication on the basis of co-accused statement. Further, referring to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tofan Singh v. The State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2013) 16 SCC 31, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the statement of the co-accused cannot be used as evidence, so far the present Petitioner is concerned. . He further contended that neither the Petitioner is present at the spot nor anything has been recovered from his exclusive and conscious possession. Therefore, the bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act would not be attracted to the facts of the present case. He further contended that the Petitioner is having one similar criminal antecedent. He further submitted that the Petitioner belongs to the locality, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding.

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposes the release of the Petitioner on pre-arrest bail on the ground that the allegations made in the F.I.R. are very serious in nature.

Taking into consideration the aforesaid submission as well as surrounding facts and materials on record, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner. However, it is directed that in the event the Petitioner surrenders before the Court in seisin over the matter within a period of four weeks from today and moves an application for bail, the Court in seisin over the mater shall consider and dispose of the bail application of the Petitioner in accordance with law on the same day. While considering the bail application of the Petitioner, the Court in seisin over the matter shall also keep in view the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh v. The State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2013) 16 SCC 31; and order dated 10.01.2022 in the matter of State by (NCB) Page 2 of 3. Bengaluru Vs. Pallulabid Ahmad Arimuta and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.242 of 2022) and shall also take into consideration the fact that the bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act would not be attracted to the facts of the present case and pass necessary order. While considering the bail application of the Petitioner, the Court in seisin over the matter shall also apply the principle of parity, if applicable.

The Case Diary be made available to the concerned court to facilitate disposal of the bail application of the Petitioner on an application being filed prior to surrender of the Petitioner along with a copy of this order.

Accordingly, the ABLAPL is disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge Rubi Page 3 of 3. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RUBI BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 03-Jan-2025 11:05:55