Orissa High Court
Mangala Singh Harijan vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 16 April, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.1521 of 2025
Mangala Singh Harijan .... Petitioner
Mr. M. Padhy, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mrs. Usharani Padhi,
Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
ORDER
16.04.2025
Order No.
01. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. The Petitioner is the accused in connection with
T.R. Case No.39(A) of 2022 pending in the Court of
learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge,
Jeypore, arising out of Jeypore Sadar P.S. Case No.219 of
2022 for commission of alleged offences under Section
20(b)(ii)(C) of N.D.P.S. Act.
3. The Petitioner, being aggrieved by the rejection of
his application for bail U/s. 439 of Cr.P.C. by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Jeypore,
by order dated 13.01.2025 in the aforementioned case,
has preferred the present BLAPL.
4. Heard Mr. Padhy, learned Counsel for the Petitioner
so also Mrs. Padhi, learned Additional Standing Counsel
for the State.
5. A query being made, learned Counsel for the
Petitioner, on instruction, submits that except the
present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioner
relating to the aforementioned P.S. Case is pending in
any other Court and the Petitioner has no criminal
antecedent of similar nature as of this case.
6. This is the second journey of the Petitioner to this
Court. Earlier bail application of the Petitioner i.e. BLAPL
No.874 of 2024, was rejected vide order 26.09.2024.
However, liberty was granted to renew his bail plea
before the trial Court.
7. Mr. Padhy, learned Counsel for the Petitioner
submits that the Petitioner is in judicial custody since
04.12.2022. The allegation against the Petitioner and the
co-accused is that they are involved in transportation of
contraband ganja to the tune of 117 Kgs. He further
submits that while not entertaining the BLAPL No.874 of
2024, the coordinate Bench granted liberty to the
Petitioner to renew his bail plea before the trial Court.
Since the Petitioner has been implicated as an accused
based on the statement of the co-accused, relying on the
judgment of the Supreme Court in Tofan Singh Vs.
State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2021) 4 SCC 1, the
Petitioner moved an application for bail. But the learned
trial Court, by misreading the said judgment so also the
statement recorded under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act,
rejected the bail application with an observation that the
role of the Petitioner accused is yet to be revealed in
connection with the transportation and procurement of
contraband ganja.
8. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits
that though there are 37 charge sheeted witnesses, in
the meantime, only one witness i.e. the Executive
Magistrate has been examined as P.W.1, who is not
supporting the prosecution. Hence, relying on the
judgment of the Supreme Court dated 28.05.2024
passed in SLP (Crl.) No.4648 of 2024 (Ankur
Chaudhury Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh), learned
Counsel for the Petitioner prays for release of the
Petitioner on bail. On being asked, learned Counsel
for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has no
other criminal antecedent.
9. Considering the period of detention of the Petitioner
in judicial custody so also keeping in view the dictum of
the Supreme Court in Ankur Chaudhury (supra), in
Rabi Prakash Vs. State of Odisha, reported in 2023
SCC Online SC 1109 and in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain
Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), reported in 2023 SCC OnlLine
SC 352, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released
on bail on such terms and conditions to be fixed by the
learned Court in seisin.
10. While releasing the Petitioner on bail, learned trial
Court in seisin shall verify the criminal antecedent of the
Petitioner of similar nature. If it comes to fore that the
Petitioner is having any such criminal antecedent of similar
nature, this order shall not be given effect to.
11. Additionally, it is directed that Petitioner shall appear
before the jurisdictional police station once in every
fortnight on such date and time to be fixed by the learned
Court in seisin till conclusion of trial. Certification of such
appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin. Apart
from the same the Petitioner will attend the Court below on
the date to which the matter would be posted for trial.
12. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands allowed and disposed
of.
13. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on
proper application as per rule.
Prasant
(S. K. MISHRA)
JUDGE
Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR PRADHAN
Designation: Secretary
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 17-Apr-2025 15:39:22
