Gyani Harijan vs State Of Odisha
2022 Latest Caselaw 1097 Ori

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                          CRLA No. 927 of 2019

                Gyani Harijan                   ....         Appellant

                             Mr.T.J. Pani, Advocate
                                    -versus-
                State of Odisha              ....     Respondent

                              Mr.D.K. Pani,
                              Addl. Standing Counsel

                                  CORAM:

                            JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
                                   ORDER

Order No. 07.02.2022

03. The matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (Video Conferencing/physical Mode).

This is an application for bail.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.

The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (rupees ten lakhs), in default, to suffer further R.I. for six months by the learned Addl. Sessions-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri in // 2 //

Criminal Trial Case No. 130 of 2016.

Perused the impugned judgment.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that out of ten years of substantive sentence imposed by the learned trial Court, the appellant has already undergone half of the substantive sentence and there is no chance of early hearing of the appeal in the near future. It is further submitted that the possession of the contraband ganja with the petitioner is very much doubtful and most of the witnesses have also not supported the prosecution witnesses and therefore, the bail application of the appellant may be favourably considered.

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submitted that commercial quantity of ganja was found from the possession of the appellant which he was carrying by using bamboo stick, placing the same on his shoulder along with co-accused persons and accordingly, he was apprehended at the spot.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of evidence available on record, the commercial quantity of ganja seized from the possession of the appellant and the bar under section 37 of

// 3 //

the N.D.P.S. Act, I am not inclined to release the appellant on bail.

Accordingly, the I.A. stands dismissed.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge

P