Page 1 of 4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2005 of 2026 Subham Dalei ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Khusbu Panigrahi -versus- State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party Represented by Adv. – Mr. S. Behera, AGA CORAM: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 21.05.2026 Order No. 03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Govt. Advocate appearing for the State- Opposite Party. Perused the materials placed before this Court. 3. The present bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection with Special Case No.01 of 2026, arising out of OIC of Nilgiri Excise Station PR No.269/2025-26, pending in the Court of learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Nilgiri for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is languishing in custody since 03.01.2026. She further contended that in the meantime, investigation has been concluded and charge sheet has been filed. Further referring to the Page 2 of 4. allegation made by the prosecution. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended that as per the prosecution allegation allegedly a total quantity of 180 grams of brown sugar was recovered from the conscious possession of the co-accused Rajiv Kumar Patra. She further contended that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the present Petitioner. Therefore, the bar under Section 37 would not be attracted to the facts of the present case. She further submitted that apart from no recovery being made from the Petitioner belongs to the locality, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that apart from no recovery being made from exclusive and conscious possession of the present Petitioner, the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedents. She further submitted that the Petitioner belongs to the locality, therefore there is no chance of his absconding. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on any stringent terms and conditions that would be imposed by this Court in the event he is released on bail. 5. Learned Additional Govt. Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Party, on the other hand, opposed the release of the Petitioner on bail on the ground of gravity and seriousness of allegation. He further submitted that the Petitioner was involved in illegal transportation of the contraband articles and while he was travelling in the same bike along with the principal accused Rajiv Kumar Patra, therefore the possibility of involved in the Petitioner in the alleged crime cannot be overruled at this juncture. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State Page 3 of 4. contended that the bail application of the Petitioner be rejected at this stage. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the background facts and circumstances of the present case and further taking into consideration the role played by the present Petitioner in the alleged crime and the fact that nothing has been recovered from the exclusive and conscious possession and the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedents, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail subject to imposition of stringent conditions. 7. Hence, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter. Release of the Petitioner shall also subject to following conditions that:- i) The Petitioner shall not be involved in any offence of similar nature; ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or try to threaten or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever; iii) shall not make any default in attending the court during trial on each date without fail; iv) shall appear before the jurisdictional Police Station once in a week, preferably on Sunday in between 10.00 A.M. to 1 P.M., for a period of two months. Thereafter, once in a Page 4 of 4. fortnight for a period of three months. Thereafter, once in a month till conclusion of the trial. 8. It is open for the Court in seisin over the matter to impose any other conditions as may be deemed just and proper. Violation of any of the conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail application. 9. It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner is subject to the condition that the court below shall verify whether the Petitioner is having any criminal antecedent of similar nature. In the event it is found that the Petitioner is having any similar criminal antecedent under the offences of NDPS Act, this bail order shall automatically stand revoked. 10. The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of. ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Sisir Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT