Orissa High Court
Ankit Singh vs State Of Odisha on 12 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.8398 of 2022
Ankit Singh .... Petitioner
Mr. S. Dasmohapatra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opp. Party
Mr. P.C. Das, ASC
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 12.10.2023
03. 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 T.R.
No.50 of 2021, arising out of Machhkund P.S. No.49 of 2021,
pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Judge, Koraput for alleged commission of offence
punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)C of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the
Petitioner is a young person who is aged about 25 years and he is
prosecuting his studies. He further submitted that the Petitioner is in
custody since 4.6.2021, i.e., from the date he was apprehended from
the spot while he was travelling in the vehicle, which was seized by
// 2 //
the police on the allegation of carrying contraband articles. Learned
counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the Petitioner is no
way involved in the crime. He was travelling in the vehicle as a
passenger. Learned counsel for the Petitioner also submitted that the
Petitioner does not have similar criminal antecedent. Learned
counsel for the Petitioner further contended that some of the co-
accused persons have been released on bail in the meantime. In
course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to
the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Muslim alias
Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi), reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC
352; Md. Raja & Anr. V. The State of West Bengal (Special Leave
to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).3133 of 2022, decided on 22.8.2022); and
Hussainara Khatoon and Others (1) v. Home Secretary, State of
Bihar, reported in (1980) 1 SCC 81. By referring to the aforesaid
judgments, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the bar
under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act would not be attracted where
the trial is prolonged unnecessary. He further contended that in Md.
Raja's case (supra) as well as Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain's case
(supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken a view that delay in
conclusion of the trial not only affects the right of the accused of
speed trial as guaranteed under Section 21 of the Constitution of
India, moreover, such right overrides the provisions contained in
Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act. In such view of the matter, it is
submitted before this Court that the bar under Section 37 of the
N.D.P.S. Act would not be attracted to the facts of the present case
considering the fact that the Petitioner is in custody for almost 2½
years.
5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-
Opposite Parties, on the other hand, contended that the Petitioners
// 3 //
were arrested from the spot while he was travelling in the vehicle, in
which, the contraband articles were kept. Therefore, he further
contended that there is no denying of the fact that the Petitioner is
not involved in the alleged crime. So far involvement of the present
Petitioner is concerned, it is stated by the learned counsel for the
State that the ground of presumption is the matter of trial and no
presumption could be drawn by this Court at this stage. He also
contended that the provision under Section 37 of the NDPS Act also
gets attracted to the case of the Petitioner and, as such, it is
contended that unless this Court is convinced that the Petitioner is
not involved in the case, the case the Petitioner cannot be considered
for his release on bail. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for
the State has submitted that the Petitioner is not entitled to be
released on bail.
6. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective
parties and on a conspectus of the surrounding facts and
circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the
Petitioner is in custody for almost 2½ years and that trial has not
commenced yet, this Court is of the view that the law laid down by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above noted judgments are
squarely applicable to the facts of the present case, therefore, the bar
under Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not be attracted to the facts
of the present case. As such, this Court is inclined to release the
Petitioner on bail subject to certain stringent conditions.
7. Hence, 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 . The
release of the Petitioner shall also be the following terms and
// 4 //
conditions:-
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 month preferably on 'Sunday'
in between 10.00 A.M. to 1.00 P.M. till
conclusion of trial; and
V. he shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court in
seisin over the matter and shall furnish his
address and mobile number to the police from
time to time.
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 learned court below shall verify whether
the Petitioner has any criminal antecedents 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
// 5 //
the date fixed on a single occasion, this order shall stand
automatically revoked and the learned court below is at liberty to
issue N.B.W. against the petitioner forthwith.
11. The Bail Application 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
