Raju Marshe vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 25 August, 2023

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Raju Marshe vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 25 August, 2023

01. 1. Since all the four BLAPLs relate to the same P.S. Case (Kalimela P.S. Case No.207 of 2022), on the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as State, they are taken up together and are disposed of by this common order.

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

3. The petitioners are accused in connection with Special G.R. Case No.121 of 2022, pending on the file of the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri, arising out of Kalimela P.S. Case No.207 of 2022 for alleged commission of offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)C/27-A of the NDPS Act.

4. Being aggrieved by the rejection of their application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri, by the impugned orders in the aforementioned cases, the present BLAPLs have been filed.

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioners are in custody since 14.08.2022 on the accusation of possessing contraband (ganja) to the tune of 664 kg 400 grams from 22 accused persons including the present petitioners.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners also relies on the orders passed by this Court in respect of the co-accused persons dated 16.08.2023 in BLAPLNos.2054, 2042, 2085 of 2023 and also orders dated 21.08.2023 in BLAPL No.1968 of 2023 and other connected matters and seeks release inter alia on the ground of parity.

7. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

8. It is the submission of the learned counsel that individual seizures from the petitioners are 30 kg 200 grams each. Hence, they ought not to be made liable for the entire seizure.

Page 3 of 4

9. Learned counsel for the State has rightly submitted that even if the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is accepted at its face value yet, individual seizure being more than the commercial quantity, in view of the rigorous of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the petitioners are not entitled to be released on bail.

10. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are the first offenders and admittedly the trial has not commenced.

11. Taking into account the release of the co-accused and keeping in view the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vrs. Central Bureau of Investigation & another, reported in 2022 (10) SCC 51 relating to parity and bleak chance of early trial, this Court directs the petitioners to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin.

12. While releasing the petitioners on bail, learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners. If it comes to fore that the petitioners have any criminal antecedent, this order shall stand recalled.

13. Additionally, it is directed that the petitioners shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once every fifteen days 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.

14. Accordingly, the BLAPLs stand disposed of.

15. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.

(V. NARASINGH) Judge Santoshi Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTOSHI LENKA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 25-Aug-2023 20:53:37 Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Orissa High Court