AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G. Satapathy, J.
This is the bail application U/S.483 of the BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Adava P.S. Case No. 178 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 91 of 2024 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Gajapati, Paralakhemundi, for commission of offence punishable U/Ss.20(b)(ii)(C)/25/29 of the NDPS Act, on the main allegation of transporting 103Kgs 600Grams of Contraband Ganja in a Mahindra Max Pick up vehicle bearing Regd. No.OD-33-AN-2111.
Heard Mr. Dayanidhi Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. C. Mohanty, learned Addl. PP in the matter and perused the record.
Bail to the petitioner is in fact sought for on the ground of delay in disposal of the case, but pursuant to the submission advanced for the petitioner, a status report as to the trial was called for from the learned trial Court, who in its report has stated that 14 out of 15 witnesses have already been examined including one IO and today, the case has been posted for examination of another IO. Right to speedy trial is in fact the fundamental right of an accused, but that will not override the conditions of Sec.37 of NDPS Act as held by the Apex Court in State of Punjab vrs. Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora; 2026 Live Law(SC) 421, wherein at paragraph-10 it is held as under:-
“10.Xx xx xxx The right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution is undoubtedly a valuable constitutional guarantee; but in the context of a special statute such as the NDPS Act dealing with commercial quantity, that right has to be read alongside, and not in displacement of the mandate of Sec.37 of NDPS Act.”
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and taking into account the materials placed on record, this Court finding the petitioner to have satisfied the conditions of Sec.37 of NDPS Act, which is sine qua non for grant of bail for commission of offence under NDPS Act involving commercial quantity, is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, more particularly when the trial is at its fag end and the case is likely to be disposed of in near future.
Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the bail application stands disposed of. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the learned trial Court, if the trial is not concluded within three months hence. A soft copy of this judgment be immediately transmitted to the Court in seisin over the matter for reference.