Orissa High Court
Bade @ Sampada Kanhar vs State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party on 23 October, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.4311 of 2025
Bade @ Sampada Kanhar ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Bikash Karna
-versus-
State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. S.K. Parhi, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
23.10.2025
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
counsel for the State. Perused the application as well as the prayer
made therein.
3. By filing the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the
Petitioner seeks for quashing of the entire criminal case in Special Case
No.45 of 2019 (NDPS), arising out of Baunsuni P.S. Case No.57 of
2019, pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special
Judge, Boudh.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that
the Petitioner does not want to press this application with liberty to
raise the ground at a later stage by filing an appropriate application. He
further contended that Petitioner has been implicated in the present
case which was registered for commission of a crime punishable under
Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act on the basis of a co-accused
statement. He further submitted that nothing was recovered from the
exclusive and conscious possession of the present Petitioner. Therefore,
the bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act would not be attracted to
the facts of the present case. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further
referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tofan
Singh v. The State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2013) 16 SCC 31,
submitted that such confessional statement of the co-accused cannot be
used as evidence against the present Petitioner. On such ground learned
counsel for the Petitioner sought for liberty to surrender before the
court below and move an application for bail.
5. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, objected to the
application filed by the Petitioner. He further contended that in the
event the Petitioner wants to surrender, then it is open to him to
surrender before the court below and move an application for bail
which shall be considered in accordance with law.
6. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective
parties and on a careful examination of the background facts of the
present case, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the present
application with the liberty as prayed for by the Petitioner.
7. Further, taking into consideration the submission made by the
learned counsel for the Petitioner, the Petitioner is permitted to
surrender before the court in seisin over the matter within three weeks
from today and move an application for bail. In such eventuality, the
court in seisin over the matter shall consider and dispose of the bail
application of the Petitioner on the same day strictly on the basis of the
materials on record and by maintaining the principles of parity, if
applicable. It is further directed that on an application being filed
prior to date of surrender of the Petitioner along with a copy of
this order, the Case Diary as well as relevant materials be placed
before the court concerned on the date of surrender of the
Petitioner for consideration of bail application of the Petitioner.
8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the CRLMC
stands disposed of.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Debasis
