Umakant Nagul vs State Of Odisha
2021 Latest Caselaw 9296 Ori

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                              BLAPL No. 6096 of 2020

              Umakant Nagul                  ....        Petitioner
                                  Mr. Asit Kumar Jena, Advocate
                                   -versus-
              State of Odisha                ....       Opp. Party
                      Ms. S. Mishra, Additional Standing Counsel

                             CORAM:
                             JUSTICE S. K. PANIGRAHI

                                          ORDER

Order No. 06.09.2021

07. 1. This matter is taken up by virtual/physical mode.

2. Heard, learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

3. The Petitioner is in custody in connection with Mathili PS Case No. 96 of 2020 corresponding to TR Case No. 65 of 2020, pending in the court of the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri, registered for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act, has filed this application under Section 439 of CrPC for his release on bail.

4. The allegation of the prosecution is that while the Police were on patrolling duty, they apprehended AKP some persons and seized 106.300 KG of contraband 'ganja' from the accused persons.

// 2 //

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has not been named and nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession as well as admittedly he was not present at the spot. The Petitioner has been implicated in this case on the basis of the statement of the co-accused. Learned counsel further advances his argument citing Hon'ble Supreme Court's Judgment in the case of Surinder Kumar Khanna vs. Intelligence Officer1 wherein it was held that mere confessional statement or disclosure statement cannot be taken as substantive piece of evidence. It has also been held that the confessional statement of the co- accused cannot be taken as substantive piece of evidence against another co-accused. The Petitioner has been in custody since 06.07.2020.

6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the bail prayer of the Petitioner.

7. Considering the submissions made, facts and circumstances of the case, taking into account the period of detention, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail with some stringent terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case with further conditions that:-

AIR 2018 SC 3574

// 3 //

i. the Petitioner shall appear before the learned trial court on each date of posting of the case;

ii. he shall not indulge in similar activities in future and

iii. he shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

8. Violation of any of the conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail.

9. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

(S. K. Panigrahi) Judge