Orissa High Court
Kumar Rana vs The State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 6 June, 2024
Author: S.K. Panigrahi
Bench: S.K. Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.5539 of 2024
Kumar Rana .... Petitioner
Mr. Jugal Kishore Panda, Adv.
-versus-
The State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. Tapas Kumar Praharaj, ASC
CORAM:
DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
Order ORDER
No. 06.06.2024
F.I.R. Dated Police Case No. and Sections
No. Station Courts' Name
0267 26.07.2023 Boudh Special Case Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of
(NDPS) No.112 the N.D.P.S. Act.
of 2023 arising
out of Boudh
P.S. Case No.267
dated 26.07.2023
pending in the
court of learned
Sessions Judge-
cum-Special
Judge, Boudh
01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
Digitally Signed 3. The Petitioner being in custody in connection with
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa Special Case (NDPS) No.112 of 2023 arising out of Boudh
Date: 07-Jun-2024 15:26:01
P.S. Case No.267 dated 26.07.2023 pending in the court of
learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Boudh,
registered for the alleged commission of offence under
Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, has filed this
petition for his release on bail.
4. The allegation as made in the F.I.R. reveals that
contraband ganja weighing 405 kgs. was being transported
in the vehicle, when it was apprehended by Police. The
driver of the vehicle is said to have fled and the helper/the
present Petitioner was nabbed. The Petitioner was,
accordingly, arrested.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the
Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing
has been seized from the possession of the present
Petitioner. He is in custody since 26.07.2023. He also
submits that the co-accused persons, who stand on similar
footing, have already been released on bail vide orders
dated 24.01.2024 and dated 10.04.2024 passed in ABLAPL
No.14667 of 2023 and ABLAPL No.1931 of 2024
respectively. He further contends that the trial has not yet
commenced.
6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contends that
the Supreme Court has held that right to have speedy trial
Designation: Personal Assistant is a fundamental right of a citizen. Hence, keeping a
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 07-Jun-2024 15:26:01
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. vrs. Home Secretary,
State of Bihar 1, 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 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."
7. 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 Bihar2 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
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
1979 AIR 1360
(1981) 3 SCC 671
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 07-Jun-2024 15:26:01
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
his right to speedy trial on the ground that he did not ask
for or insist upon a speedy trial.
8. The Supreme Court has also held in Mohd. Muslim @
Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi)3 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.
9. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the
bail prayer of the Petitioner.
10. Without going into the merits of the case and
considering the submissions made by the learned counsel
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 07-Jun-2024 15:26:01
for the parties, this Court directs the court in seisin over the
matter to release the Petitioner on bail in the aforesaid case
on some stringent terms and conditions with further
conditions that:
i. the Petitioner shall plant 50 saplings of local
variety like mango, neem, tamarind etc.
around his village over the Government
land/community land/private land, if it is in
the possession of the Petitioner.
ii. the Petitioner shall appear before the court in
seisin over the matter on each date of posting
of the case till completion of trial;
iii. the Petitioner shall not indulge himself in any
criminal activities in future;
iv. 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 I.I.C of the concerned Police Station shall see;
whether the Petitioner has planted the saplings or not.
12. The District Nursery/D.F.O shall extend the helping
hand by supplying the saplings to the Petitioner.
13. The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.
(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 07-Jun-2024 15:26:01
