ANWAR Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode). Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. This is an application under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with S.T.F. P.S. Case No.02 of 2021 corresponding to T.R. Case No.02 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge -cum-Special Judge, under N.D.P.S. Act, Khordha for the offences punishable under Sec. 21(c)/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

(2.) The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of learned 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge - cum- Special Judge, under N.D.P.S. Act, Khordha, which was rejected on 1/5/2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was taken into judicial custody in connection with this case on 7/1/2021 and since 2/5/2022, no witness has been examined as there was no Presiding Officer in the Court and he is a local man and in view of the delayed disposal of the trial, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered. As per the order dtd. 28/7/2023, learned trial Court has submitted the status report which indicates that charge has been framed under Sec. 21(c)/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act and out of nineteen charge sheeted witnesses, only two witnesses have already been examined as on date. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that commercial quantity of brown sugar was seized from the possession of the petitioner and in view of the bar under Sec. 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.

(3.) Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the quantity of brown sugar seized and in view of the bar under Sec. 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, while not inclining to release the petitioner on bail on merit, but taking into account his period of detention in judicial custody and since only two witnesses have been examined so far in the trial Court for more than one year and two months and since there is no Presiding Officer since 1/9/2022, I am inclined to release the petitioner on interim bail for a period of three months from the date of release and the petitioner shall surrender before the learned trial Court immediately on expiry of the three months period. For the above period, let the petitioner be released on interim bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000.00(rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin over the matter with further terms and conditions that while on interim bail, the petitioner shall not try to come in contact with any of the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities and he shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date on which the date would be fixed for trial during the interim bail period. Violation of any terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of interim bail. Accordingly, the BLAPL is disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.