Orissa High Court
Thomas Pujari vs State Of Odisha on 12 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.6116 of 2022
Thomas Pujari .... Petitioner
Mr. Amit Biswal, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opp. Party
Mr. P.C. Das, ASC
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 12.10.2023
11. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned
Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party.
Perused the materials placed before this Court.
3. The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has
been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection with Spl.
G.R. Case No.34 of 2021, arising out of Badagada P.S. No.261 of
2021, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-
cum-Special Judge, Bhanjanagar for alleged commission of offences
punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)C/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the
Petitioner is in custody since 09.09.2021 on being arrested from the
spot by the police. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for
the Petitioner that the present Petitioner is the Helper of the vehicle
in which the contraband articles were seized and subsequently
// 2 //
recovered by the police party. Learned counsel for the Petitioner
further contended that co-accused, namely, Phillip Raita has been
released on bail in BLAPL No.2789 of 2023. It is also contended that
in the meantime the investigation has been concluded and charge
sheet has been filed. It is further submitted that the Petitioner does
not have any similar criminal antecedent. In course of his argument,
learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the case has been
posted for trial and, out of 14 charge sheeted witnesses, none has
been examined in the meantime. Therefore, there is no possibility of
trial being concluded in near future. In the aforesaid context, learned
counsel for the Petitioner referring to the judgments of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Dheeraj Kumar Shukla v. The State of Uttar
Pradesh (Special Leave Appeal No.6690 of 2022, decided on
25.01.2023) as well as by a detailed judgment in the case of Mohd.
Muslim alias Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi), reported in 2023 SCC
OnLine SC 352, submitted before this Court that if there is
unnecessary delay in trial which affecting the rights of the accused-
Petitioner as guaranteed under the Constitution of India, then the bar
under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act would not attracted. In the
aforesaid background, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted
that the Petitioner being a person belonging to the locality, there is
no possibility of absconding or fleeing away from justice on his
release on bail on such terms and conditions as would be deem fit
and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-
Opposite Party, on the other hand, opposed the prayer for bail of the
Petitioner on the ground that in the event the Petitioner is released on
bail, the trial would be further delayed. He also submitted before this
Court that the cases of illegal transportation of contraband Ganja are
// 3 //
on rise in State of Odisha now-a-days. Therefore, no leniency should
be shown to the accused persons, who are involved in such type of
offences. In such view of the matter, learned Additional Standing
Counsel submitted that the bail application of the Petitioner be
rejected at this stage.
6. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective
parties and keeping in view the surrounding facts and circumstances
of the case as well as the fact that the Petitioner does not have similar
criminal antecedent and he is in custody for more than two years and
the trial has not commenced as of now, this Court is inclined to
release the Petitioner on bail.
7. Accordingly, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on
bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the
like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter
with further conditions that :-
(i) The Petitioner shall not be involved in any
offence of similar nature;
(ii) he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence
or try to threaten or influence the witnesses in
any manner whatsoever;
(iii) he shall not make any default in attending the
court during trial;
(iv) he shall appear before the concerned Police
Station once in a fortnight preferably on
'Sunday' in between 10.00 A.M. to 1.00 P.M. till
conclusion of trial; and
// 4 //
(v) he shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court in
seisin over the matter without prior permission of
the Court in seisin over the matter.
Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail.
8. It is open for the Court in seisin over the matter to impose any
other conditions as may be deemed just and proper.
9. It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner is
subject to the condition that the court below shall verify whether the
Petitioner has any criminal antecedent of similar nature. In the event
it is found that the Petitioner has any criminal antecedent, this bail
order shall automatically stand revoked.
10. It is made clear that if the Petitioner fails to attend the court on
the date fixed on a single occasion, this order shall stand
automatically revoked and the court below is at liberty to issue
N.B.W. against the Petitioner forthwith.
11. The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.
( A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge
Debasis
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: DEBASIS AECH
Designation: Secretary
Reason: Authentication
Location: OHC CUTTACK
Date: 17-Oct-2023 17:36:00
