Lipun @ Lipan Kumar Majhi vs State Of Odisha ... Opposite Party
2026 Latest Caselaw 3473 Ori

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 3473 Ori
Judgement Date : 16 April, 2026

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Lipun @ Lipan Kumar Majhi vs State Of Odisha ... Opposite Party on 16 April, 2026

Author: G. Satapathy

Bench: G. Satapathy

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
      BLAPL Nos. 12727 of 2025 & 3343 of 2024
   (In the matter of application under Section 483 of the
   BNSS, 2023).

  Lipun @ Lipan Kumar Majhi       ...          Petitioners
  (In BLAPL No.12727 of 2025)
  Susanta Kumar Mohanty
  (In BLAPL No. 3343 of 2024)
                         Mrs. S. Jena, Sr. Advocate along
                             with Ms. S. Panda, Advocate
                           (In BLAPL No. 12727 of 2025)
                                  Mr. A.S. Paul, Advocate
                            (In BLAPL No. 3343 of 2024)
                             -versus-
  State of Odisha                       ...     Opposite Party
                                    Mr. S.C. Pradhan, Addl. PP


             CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

DATE OF HEARING & DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16.04.2026 (ORAL)

G. Satapathy, J.

1. Since these two bail applications arise out of

one and same case record, the same are heard

together and disposed of by this common order with

the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. These are bail applications U/S.483 of BNSS by

the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with

Golanthara PS Case No.403 of 2023 corresponding to

G.R. Case No. 61 of 2023(N) (Part File) pending in the

BLAPL Nos.12727 of 2025 & 3343 of 2024

file of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge,

Berhampur, for commission of offences punishable

U/Ss. 20(b)(ii)(C)/25/29 of NDPS Act, on the allegation

of transporting 1108.510 Kgs of Contraband Ganja in

an Eicher truck bearing Regd. No.OD-02-AT-5945 by

entering into conspiracy with each other.

3. Heard, Mrs. Sujata Jena, learned Senior

Counsel, who is being assisted by Ms. Sonali Panda,

learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No. 12727

of 2025, Mr. Amlan Shakti Paul, learned counsel for the

petitioner in BLAPL No. 3343 of 2024 and Mr. S.C.

Pradhan, learned Addl. PP in these matters and perused

the record.

4. Mrs. Jena emphasizes for grant of bail to the

accused- Lipun @ Lipan Kumar Majhi mainly for his

implication on the statement of co-accused, but there

appears allegation against both the petitioners for

transporting 1108.510Kgs of Contraband Ganja, which

is admittedly much more than the commercial quantity.

Grant or refusal of bail for offences under NDPS Act

involving commercial quantity is governed by Sec.37 of

BLAPL Nos.12727 of 2025 & 3343 of 2024

NDPS Act, which prescribes that no person accused of

offence under NDPS Act involving commercial quantity

shall be released on bail, where the Public Prosecutor

opposes such bail application; unless the Court is

satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing

that the accused is not guilty of the offence and he is

unlikely to commit offence while on bail. It is, however,

found from the record that the petitioner-Lipun @ Lipan

Kumar Majhi appears to have evaded the process of law

by remaining elusive to police people for more than two

years, whereas the petitioner-Susanta Kumar Mohanty

was allegedly apprehended from the spot on

19.08.2023. The copy of charge sheet as filed in this

case implicates both the petitioners for transporting

huge quantity of Contraband Ganja. In the context of

grant or refusal of bail for an accused for commission of

offence under NDPS Act involving commercial quantity,

this Court considers it apt to refer to the decision of the

Apex Court in Union of India vs. Ajay Kumar Singh

@ Pappu; (2023) SCC OnLine SC 346, wherein the

Apex Court set aside the order granting bail to the BLAPL Nos.12727 of 2025 & 3343 of 2024

respondent-accused therein after taking note of the

following facts at paragraph-9 & 11 which reads as

under:-

"9. The driver of the vehicle Om Prakash Yadav revealed that he was driving the truck with the co-accused Amit Yadav as helper of one Bittu Dada of Jamshedpur and at the behest of Shri Ram Pravesh Yadav, resident of Ballia, he had gone to Jamshedpur where the acquaintance of respondent-accused gave him the truck which was loaded with ganja for safe delivery in lieu of Rs.50,000/-. He further informed that the respondent- accused indulges in illicit trade of ganja.

11. The information revealed by the above two accused persons indicated that both of them knew the respondent-accused and that they had connived with him to transport the illicit ganja and that they were in direct contact with the respondent-accused all through on his mobile number. The facts as unfurled from the complaint/FIR and the statements of the above two accused persons recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act reveals that respondent-accused is the kingpin and the organiser of the illicit trade in ganja."

5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstance

and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of

the offence as alleged against the petitioners vis-à-vis

the accusations sought to be brought against them and

regard being had to the recovery and seizure of such a

BLAPL Nos.12727 of 2025 & 3343 of 2024

huge quantity of Contraband Ganja, which is well above

the commercial quantity from the vehicle allegedly in

occupation of the petitioner-Susanta Kumar Mohanty

and the consequent failure of both the petitioners to

satisfy the conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act, which

is sine qua non for grant of bail to an accused under