The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.13337 of 2023 Chakradhara Patra State of Odisha …. Petitioner Mr. Suryakanta Dwibedi, Adv. -versus- …. Opposite Party Mr.Gyana Ranjan Mohapatra, ASC CORAM: DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI Order No.
Decision
ORDER 30.11.2023 Sections Section 20(b)(ii)(C)/25/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act. F.I.R. No. 84 Dated Police Station 20.11.2020 Raikia Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name C.T. Case No.72 of 2020 arising out of P.S. Case No.84 2020 of pending in the Court of learned Special Judge-cum- Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge, Balliguda 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. Page 1 of 6 Signature Not Verified 01. Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 30-Nov-2023 14:52:46 // 2 // 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 3. The Petitioner being in custody in connection with C.T. Case No.72 of 2020 corresponding to Raikia P.S. Case No.84 of 2020, pending in the court of the learned Special Judge-cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Baliguda for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/25/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, has filed this petition for his release on bail. 4. It is alleged in the FIR that on 20.11.2020 the S.I. of Raikia Police Station along with his staff proceeded to Rammunda Chhaka with the direction of I.I.C., Raikia Police Station to ascertain the information of transportation of contraband articles by three persons. At about 10.20 A.M, they found an Auto bearing Registration No.OD-07-V-5019 approaching from Raikia. The police personnel signaled the Driver of the said Auto to stop. The Driver stopped the Auto. On being searched, they found one big plastic bag on the bank side of the Auto. It is further alleged that the driver admitted to have the knowledge of possession of the contraband Ganja inside the bag. The contraband Ganja weighing 24 kgs. 400 gms. was seized in presence of the witnesses. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 30-Nov-2023 14:52:46 Page 2 of 6 // 3 // 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is in custody since 20.11.2020. Charge has been framed in this case. The Petitioner was travelling in the said Auto with another person when the police stopped and raided the Auto. He further submits that there is no conclusive proof that the contraband materials belong to the present Petitioner. Since another occupant and the Auto Driver were there in the Auto, the Petitioner was chance occupant of the contraband. 6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the bail prayer of the Petitioner. 7. The Petitioner has already spent in custody for about more than one year. The 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, State of Bihar, 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 Page 3 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 30-Nov-2023 14:52:46 // 4 // 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." 8. 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 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 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 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 30-Nov-2023 14:52:46 1 1981)3 SCC 671 Page 4 of 6 // 5 // his right to speedy trial on the ground that he did not ask for or insist upon a speedy trial. 9. 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. 10. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail. Accordingly, it is directed that the court in seisin over the matter shall release the Petitioner on bail in the aforesaid case on stringent terms and conditions with further conditions that: i. ii. he shall appear before the learned trial court on each date of posting of the case; the Petitioner shall not criminal activity in future; indulge in any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 30-Nov-2023 14:52:46 2 SLP (Crl.) No. 915 of 2023 Page 5 of 6 // 6 // iii. 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 BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of. Judge (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Ayaskanta Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 30-Nov-2023 14:52:46 Page 6 of 6