Panchanan Sahu vs State Of Odisha

A.K. Mohapatra, J

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Party. Perused the materials placed before this Court.

The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail relating to Manamunda P.S. Case No.94 of 2023, corresponding to Special (NDPS) Case No.111 of 2023, pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Kantamal, for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 29 of NDPS Act.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is in custody since 07.10.2024. He further contended that the investigation has been completed and the final charge-sheet has been filed. Learned counsel for the Petitioner referring to the allegation made in the FIR, contended that a total quantity of 3 Quintal 69 Kgs. of contraband ganja has been recovered from a jungle. He further contended that nobody was arrested from the spot. Subsequently, the Petitioner has been arrested in connection with the present case. He further submitted that some of the witnesses have identified the present Petitioner. He also contended that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the Petitioner relied upon a certificate issued by Forest Range Office, Manamunda Range vide Memo No.1154 dated 02.11.2023, and submits that, from the said memo it is clear that the Petitioner was on duty and engaged in elephant tracking, forest protection duty and other duty under Gundulia Section & Sagada Section for the whole day and night on 03.04.2023 with forest staffs and squads. The aforesaid certificate has been issued by the public officer under the Right to Informant Act, therefore, the same cannot be discarded altogether. Moreover, it was found from the case record that nobody was arrested from the spot. Therefore the presence of the Petitioner at the spot can only be established during trial. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that since the Petitioner is working as a forest guard, there is no chance of him absconding. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on any terms and condition which the Petitioner undertakes to abide by while on bail.

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that the allegations made in the FIR are serious in nature. He further contended that there are ample materials on record to establish the presence of the Petitioner at the spot. Learned counsel for the State submitted that even though the Petitioner fled away from the spot after seeing the raiding party, he was later identified by witnesses. In such view of the matter, Learned counsel for the State opposed the release of the Petitioner on bail and submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected at this juncture.

Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful consideration of the surrounding facts and circumstances of the present case as well as materials on record, further taking note of the fact that the Petitioner is a forest guard and, taking into consideration the certified memo issued by the Forest Range Office, Manamunda Range, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter.

Violation of any of the aforesaid terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner be subject to the condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the Petitioner. In the event it is found that the Petitioner is having any similar criminal antecedent, this bail order shall automatically stand revoked.

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

.....…………………………….