AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G. Satapathy, J.
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.
These are the bail applications U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Khajuripada PS Case No.115 of 2025 corresponding to CT (N) Case No.87 of 2025 pending in the file of learned Special Judge, Phulbani, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.20(b)(ii)(C)/ 25/29 of the NDPS Act, on the main allegation of escorting by a Bajaj Pulsar Motor Cycle bearing Regd. No.OD-25-Q-3223 the Tata Safari Car bearing Regd. No.OR-05-AC-3393 carrying 70Kgs 300Grams of Contraband Ganja.
Heard, Mr. Surendra Kumar Biswal, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No. 4872 of 2026; Mr. Akshaya Kumar Subudhi, learned counsel for the Petitioner in BLAPL No. 5457 of 2026 and Mr. T.K. Acharya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record including the certified copy of deposition of PW1 to PW4 as produced. On being queried about the criminal antecedent of the petitioners, Mr. Biswal & Mr. Subudhi volunteer to withhold bail to the petitioners, if he/they is/are found to have any criminal antecedent of similar nature for commission of offence under NDPS Act.
Admittedly, the petitioners were taken into custody on 22.03.2025, but in the meantime, charge sheet has already been submitted and trial has commenced with examination of four witnesses, however, the trial is yet to be concluded and there are 18 charge sheeted witnesses and, therefore, the trial would take some time. Besides, out of the four witnesses so far examined, three are Police personnels and they have stated in their evidence that the Petitioners on being asked disclosed before them to have been transporting Contraband articles, but disclosure of accused before Police Official is not admissible under law in view of the judgment in Tofan Singh Vrs. State of Tamil Nadu; (2020) 80 OCR (SC) 641. Besides, no Contraband article was recovered from the exclusive and conscious possession of the Petitioners. Further, it is claimed that the petitioners are not having any criminal antecedents. In the aforesaid facts and circumstance of the case and on a conspectus of the materials placed on record together with the claim of the Petitioners for not having any criminal antecedent of similar nature, the petitioners would be considered to have satisfied the conditions of Sec.37 of NDPS Act, if they are not having any criminal antecedent of similar nature for commission of offence under NDPS Act.
For the reason stated hereinabove and taking into account the other circumstances on record in entirety, this Court without expressing any view on merit admits the petitioners to bail, but subject to verification of their criminal antecedent.
Hence, these two bail applications of the petitioners namely Rahul @ Anil Rout (In BLAPL No.4872 of 2026) and Bibhuti Sahu (In BLAPL No.5457 of 2026) stand allowed and each of the petitioners is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it.
In view of the specific submission as advanced for the petitioners, the benefit of this order shall not be extended to the concerned petitioner(s), if he/they is/are found to have any criminal antecedent of similar nature for commission of offence under NDPS Act.
Accordingly, these BLAPLs stand disposed of. A soft copy of this order be immediately communicated to the concerned Court, who shall afterwards communicate the same to the concerned Jail through e-mail for reference.