AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V. Narasingh, J
Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
The Petitioners are accused in T.R. Case No.89 of 2023 pending on the file of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Sambalpur, arising out of P.R. No.46 of 2023-24 for commission of the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S Act.
Being aggrieved by the rejection of their application for bail U/s. 439 Cr.P.C by the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Sambalpur, by order dated 17.10.2023 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.
This Court by order dated 14.09.2023 in BLAPL No.10026 of 2023 directed release of the Petitioners who are accused of being possession of contraband (ganja) to the tune of 15 Kg., taking into account that they are in custody since 4.6.2023 and filing of the final P.R. on 3.8.2023 subject to verification criminal antecedents since it was stated that they are the first offenders and also considering the submission of the learned counsel for the State that both the Petitioners do not ordinarily reside within the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Court in seisin.
Since it came to fore that the Petitioners have criminal antecedents, learned Court in seisin did not release the Petitioner. Hence, this is the second journey of the Petitioners to this Court.
By way of additional affidavit, learned counsel for the Petitioners has indicated that the antecedents so far as Petitioner No.1 is concerned, he is stated to be an accused in 2(a)CC Case No.61 of 2019 under Section 34(A) of the M.P. Excise Act and Jabera P.S. Case No.42 of 2023 under Sections 294/323/506 IPC.
It is stated by the learned counsel that in Paragraph-2 of the affidavit, G.R. Case number has been mentioned inadvertently but it is in fact a P.S Case number.
So far as Petitioner No.2 is concerned, it is stated that he is an accused in 2(a)CC Case No.76 of 2018 under Section 34(A) of the M.P Excise Act of P.S.-Kumbhari, Dist-Damoh, Madhya Pradesh.
It is submitted by the learned counsel that since the quantity of contraband seized is less than the commercial quantity, considering the period of custody and the nature of antecedents, the Petitioners may be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail, inter alia, on the ground that the Petitioners did not approach this Court in clean hands.
Taking into account the quantity of contraband seized, this Court directs the Petitioners to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned court in seisin to ensure their presence on each date of trial.
To allay the legitimate apprehension of the learned Public Prosecutor regarding securing the presence of the Petitioners during trial since they do not belong to the State of Odisha, additionally, it is directed that petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Court in seisin and shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once every month on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin till conclusion of trial. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin.
Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rule.
.……………………………..