Orissa High Court
Irfan Ali vs State Of Odisha .......... Opposite ... on 20 September, 2025
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.8883 of 2025
Irfan Ali ........ Petitioner
Ms. Diptirekha Nanda, Adv.
-Versus-
State of Odisha .......... Opposite Party
Mr. Rajdeep Pradhan, ASC
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
ORDER
20.09.2025
Order No.
01.
FIR/PR Dated Police Case No. and Sections
No. Station Courts' Name
132/2025- 13.07.2025 Jharsuguda P.R. No.132 Section
of 2025/26 of, 21(b) of
District- NDPS Act
Mobile Unit
Jharsuguda
corresponding
to 2(a)CC
Case No.18 of
2025 pending
before the
learned court
of District and
Sessions
Judge-cum-
Special Judge,
Jharsuguda
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.
3. The petitioner is in custody in connection with P.R. No.132 of
2025/26 of, District- Mobile Unit Jharsuguda corresponding to
2(a)CC Case No.18 of 2025 pending before the learned court of
District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Jharsuguda, has
filed the present application seeking release on bail. The case
has been registered for alleged offences punishable under
Section 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 13.07.2025
at about 09.20 A.M., after getting reliable information from the
RPF Post Commander Sir Yogendra Kumar, the Inspector of
Excise District Mobile Unit, Jharsuguda recovered and seized
one white colour Jari Basta containing 164 sealed bottles of
codeine phosphate onerex cough syrup each containing 100 ml
of cough syrup, in total 16.400 liters of codeine mixed cough
syrup from the exclusive and conscious possession of the
Petitioner at Jharsuguda Railway Station Platform No.1 towards
Sambalpur end, while he was transporting the same by a white
colour Jari sack.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner
is in judicial custody since 13.07.2025. He further submits that
though the investigation has been progressed a lot, the
materials have not been collected by the I.O. to connect the
Petitioner in this case. Accordingly, it is prayed that the
Petitioner be released on bail.
6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner also relies on the judgment
of the Supreme Court in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State
(NCT of Delhi)1, wherein the Court emphasized that
incarceration has particularly harsh and far-reaching
consequences for individuals from the weakest economic strata.
It leads to immediate loss of livelihood, disruption of family
structures, and social alienation. The Court observed that, in
such circumstances, prolonged pre-trial detention inflicts
irreparable harm--especially if the accused is ultimately
acquitted. Therefore, the judiciary must remain sensitive to
these consequences and ensure that trials, particularly those
arising under special statutes with stringent provisions, are
prioritized and concluded expeditiously.
SLP (Crl.) No.915 of 2023.
9. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer
for bail.
10. Without entering into the merits of the case, and considering
the facts and circumstances and since there is an assessment of
the finding that the alleged syrup bags have been seized from
the Petitioner in absence of any direct evidence, it is directed
that the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case
subject to stringent terms and conditions as deemed just and
proper by the learned court seized of the matter, with the
further condition that:-
i. The Petitioner shall appear before the local Police
Station on every Monday in between 10 A.M. to 1.00 PM.
ii. The Petitioner shall not indulge himself in any
criminal offence while on bail.
iii. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or
intimidate the prosecution witnesses in any manner.
iv. The Petitioner, shall plant 100 saplings of local
varieties, such as mango, neem, tamarind, etc., around
his village on government land, community land, or
private land in the possession of the petitioner or his
family members. In the event that suitable land is
unavailable, the Revenue Authority shall assist in
identifying land for the plantation.
Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail cancellation
of the bail.
11. The I.I.C. of the concerned police station, in coordination
with the local Forest Officer, shall monitor whether the
Petitioner has planted the saplings as required.
12. It is further directed that the Petitioner shall file an affidavit
before the local police station, confirming that the saplings have
been planted and that the petitioner will maintain those plants
for a period of two years.
13. The District Nursery/District Forest Officer (D.F.O.) shall
extend assistance to the petitioners by supplying the necessary
saplings.
14. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Judge
Sumitra
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 23-Sep-2025 17:23:30
