Orissa High Court
Bibek Ranjan Pradhan vs State Of Odisha ... Opposite Party on 22 December, 2025
Author: G. Satapathy
Bench: G. Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.13359 of 2025
Bibek Ranjan Pradhan ... Petitioner
Mr. J. Katikia, Advocate along
with Mr. S. Moharana, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha ... Opposite Party
Mr. M.R. Patra, Addl. PP
CORAM:
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
ORDER(ORAL)
22.12.2025 Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).
2. This is the bail application U/S.483 of the BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Choudwar P.S. Case No.340 of 2025 corresponding to G.R.(Special) Case No.15 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Cuttack, for commission of offence punishable U/S.20(b)(ii)(C)/ 29 of the NDPS Act, on the main allegation of assisting the co-accused by arranging two vehicles i.e. one Innova and one Maruti Suzuki Fronx car for collection and transportation of Contraband Ganja to the tune of 198Kgs 500 Grams.
3. Heard, Mr. Janmejaya Katikia, learned counsel, who enters appearance for the petitioner along with counsel Mr. S. Moharana in the Court today by filing appearance memo which is taken on record and Mr. Page 1 of 3 M.R. Patra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record.
4. Admittedly, the name of the present petitioner does not figure out in the FIR, but the Police after completion of investigation has submitted the charge sheet by observing inter alia as under:-
"xx xx xx during course of investigation of the case it came to light that accused person Bibek Ranjan Pradhan had arranged both the Innova and Fronx car for commission of crime but he did not go to Kandhamal for collecting the Ganja."
Further, the present petitioner was neither apprehended from the spot nor was found with conscious possession of any Contraband article, rather his implication is primarily on the basis of statement of co-accused-Ajay Kumar Chhotaray and witness-Sarada Prasanna Mohapatra, however, the witness Sarada Prasanna Mohapatra has only stated about the petitioner taking the vehicles on hire. Be that as it may, at the stage of consideration of bail, the exact role of accused is not required to be ascertained, rather the same would be in the domain of the learned trial Court, who after analyzing the evidence that would be led before it can ascertain such fact. In the aforesaid backdrop and on going through the materials placed on record, this Court considers that the petitioner has satisfied the conditions of Sec.37 of NDPS Act.
5. For the reasons stated hereinabove and regard being had to the pre-trial detention of the petitioner in Page 2 of 3 custody since 13.06.2025 and taking into account the mode and manner of implication of the present petitioner together with his liability as per the charge sheet for commission of offence U/S. 29 of the NDPS Act, this Court without expressing any view on merits, admits the petitioner to bail.
6. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and he is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) 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.
7. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.
(G. Satapathy) Judge S.Sasmal Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Page 3 of 3 Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 23-Dec-2025 11:06:01