Gagan Samal @ Dipu vs State Of Orissa

G. Satapathy, J.

This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Soro PS Case No. 963 of 2025 corresponding to Spl. Case No. 65 of 2025 pending in the file of learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Soro, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.21(C)/29 of NDPS Act, on the main allegation of possessing 504Grams of Brown Sugar, along with co-accused persons.

In the course of hearing, Mr.Sarbeswar Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although there appears allegation against the petitioner for possessing commercial quantity of Brown Sugar, but no Contraband article was found from the exclusive and conscious possession of the petitioner, rather he has been implicated in this case on the basis of statement of co-accused Laxman Das. Mr.Sahoo further submits that the petitioner is also involved in Soro PS Case No. 901 of 2025, but the implication of the petitioner therein is on the basis of inadmissible material and thereby, such criminal case would not be an impediment to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, Mr.Sahoo prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

On the other hand, Mr.R.B.Mishra, learned Addl. PP submits that not only the present petitioner has allegedly committed theft from the Court Malkhana, but also he is allegedly found to have committed theft of articles like gold, silver & Brown Sugar from the Court Malkhana and he having been found in possession of 504Grams of Brown Sugar, along with co-accused persons is required to satisfy the conditions of Sec. 37 of NDPS Act, but since the petitioner has not been able to satisfy the conditions of Sec. 37 of NDPS Act, his bail application may kindly be rejected.

After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against the petitioner and others for committing theft in the Court Malkhana and taking away gold, silver & Contraband article like Brown Sugar. Besides, there is allegation against the petitioner that he was jointly possessing Contraband article of 504Grams of Brown Sugar along with co-accused persons. Whether the petitioner was found in exclusive and conscious possession of Contraband article is a question of fact and can be gone into at the trial, but fact remains that the petitioner and others were apprehended form the same house where from the commercial quantity of Contraband article was allegedly recovered. Section 37 of NDPS Act prescribes that no person accused of an offence under NDPS Act involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail, where the public prosecutor opposes such bail application of the accused; unless the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. In the fitness of things and on consideration of materials placed on record, since the petitioner is not only involved in another case, but also there appears allegation against the petitioner for jointly possessing 504Grams of Brown Sugar, which is coming under commercial quantity and thereby, the petitioner has to satisfy the conditions of Sec.37 of NDPS Act, but the petitioner having not satisfied the conditions of Sec. 37 of NDPS Act is not entitled to bail.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the learned Court in seisin over the matter.