Savitri Ratho, J
1. Mr. P.K. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset mentioned that though the case is one under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act as 8 kgs. 200 grams of ganja has allegedly been seized, but inadvertently due to typographical error he has mentioned that the offence is one under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act in the synopsis as well as in the bail application.
2. This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner in connection with Hinjilicut Excise Station P.S. Case No. 62 of 2023-24 corresponding to 2(a) C.C. Case No. 01 of 2024 (N), pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, Chatrapur under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. The prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 22.01.2024 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, Chatrapur.
4. The allegations in brief against the petitioner are that on 18.01.2024, while the excise officials were performing patrolling duty on N.H.-59 near village Sahajain, they found the petitioner standing on the way holding a pink colour jari basta. On search a jari basta containing 8 kgs. 200 grams of ganja was seized from his possession. As he could not produce any license or authority for possessing the same, the petitioner was arrested and the ganja was seized.
5. Mr. P.K. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 18.01.2024 and does not have any criminal antecedents. He also submits that the in view of the quantity of ganja seized, the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act will not be attracted for consideration of his prayer for bail.
6. Ms. S. Mishra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating that these types of crimes are increasing every day and since the investigation is in progress and the antecedents of the petitioner has not been verified, he should not be released on bail.
7. Considering the quantity of ganja seized and the submission that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents, I am inclined to allow the prayer for bail.
8. The petitioner- Sunil Kumar Nayak shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the learned Court in seisin over the matter, after the learned Court verifies that the petitioner does not have any antecedents under the NDPS Act, including the following conditions:
(i) He will not indulge in any criminal activity while on bail.
(ii) He will not threaten or try to influence prosecution witnesses while on bail.
(iii) He will appear before the I.O. as and when required for the purpose of investigation.
(iv) He will remain present on each date fixed for trial subject to any order passed by the learned trial Court under Section 317 Crl.P.C.
9. Violation of any condition will entail in cancellation of bail.
10. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
11. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
………………………………
