p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.4964 of 2025 Manoj Kumar Majhi ..…... Petitioner Mr. P. K. Mishra, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha ………. Opposite Party Mr. Sonak Mishra, ASC CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI ORDER 16.05.2025 Order No. 01. F.I.R No. Dated Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name Sections 31 11.03.2025 Gudari T.R. Case No.28 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge, Gunupur U/s 20(b)(ii)(c)/25 /29 of the NDPS Act 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. The Petitioner, who is in custody in connection with Gudari P.S. Case No.31 of 2025 corresponding to T.R. Case No.28 of 2025, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Gunupur, and registered for the alleged commission of offences under Section 20(b)(ii)(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act., has filed this petition seeking release on bail. 3. The brief fact of the prosecution case is that FIR lodged by S.I. of Gudari Police Station inter alia alleging that while she was performing patrolling duty along with other staffs on 11.03.2025, at about 11.15 A.M. they found some persons standing near Badabhuin Chowk and there is a Motor Cycle and something covered with black color jerry and on suspicion they stopped, but on seeing police, they tried to flee from the spot. It is alleged that the Police personnels could catch seven persons and then they searched the bag, found 3 numbers of jerry bags. It is further alleged that on search they found ganja inside the Bag and thereafter on query the accused persons disclosed their names and addresses. On weighment, the contraband material weighing 38.115 Kg was seized from the joint possession of the accused persons including the present petitioner. The quantity of ganja seized obviously falls under the bar of Section 37 of NDPS Act. 4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner having been arrested in the case is in custody since 24.07.2024. He submits that nothing has been seized from the conscious possession of the Petitioner. It is also submitted that the Petitioner being the permanent resident of the District of Rayagada, there remains no scope on his part to flee from justice and question of tampering the evidence does not arise, he urges for grant of bail to the Petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail. 6. Considering the submissions made and on going through the materials as placed, further keeping in view the nature and gravity of the offence for which the Petitioner is said to have been involved and on the face of the bar contained under section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. 7. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands dismissed. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of the order pas per Rules. (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Judge Gitanjali