Sarant Majhi vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party
2025 Latest Caselaw 3232 Ori

Orissa High Court

Sarant Majhi vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 7 August, 2025

Author: V. Narasingh

Bench: V. Narasingh

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                      ABLAPL No. 8976 of 2025

        Sarant Majhi                    ....         Petitioner
                                   Mr. A.K. Sahoo, Advocate
                               -versus-

        State of Odisha                 ....    Opposite Party
                                             Mr. S. Panda, ASC

                       CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
                                   ORDER

07.08.2025 Order No.

01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The Petitioner is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with T.R. Case No.8 of 2025 pending on the file of learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge, Bisamcuttack, arising out of Ambadola P.S. Case No.154 of 2025 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c)/25/29 of NDPS Act.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that admittedly the Petitioner is the owner of the auto rickshaw from which contraband to the tune 21kgs 500gms (Ganja) was recovered and he has no conscious and exclusive possession and his implication is on account of the co-accused statement, hence placing reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Tofan Singh vrs. State of Tamil Nadu, (2021) 4 SCC 1 it is urged that the bar contained in

Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act is not attracted. Hence, the Petitioner may be protected by protected by pre-arrest bail.

4. In this context learned counsel also refers to the latest judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vrs. Central Bureau of Investigation & another, 2023 SCC Online SC 452 clarifying the position that anticipatory bail is just another facet of bail and all the conditions while considering bail also apply equal measure to anticipatory bail application.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail inter alia on the ground that the investigation is at a nascent stage.

6. Taking into account the nature of allegation and the role ascribed to the Petitioner, this Court is not inclined to entertain this application. However, in the event the Petitioner surrenders before the learned Court in seisin in the aforesaid case and moves an application for his release on bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit.

7. The ABLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

(V. NARASINGH) Judge

Ayesha

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack