Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3429 (ORI)

BHIMASEN JENA v. STATE OF ODISHA

BLAPL/13709/2025 · 2026-05-02

Gourishankar Satapathy

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.13709 of 2025 Bhimasen Jena … Petitioner Mr. M.K. Chand, Advocate -versus- State of Orissa … Opposite Party Mr. P. Satpathy, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL)02.05.2026 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Baghamari PS Case No.72 of 2023 corresponding to TR Case No.49(B) of 2023 pending in the file of learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge- cum-Special Judge, Khurda for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.21(b)/29 of the NDPS Act on the main allegation of jointly possessing 13.47grams of Brown sugar, along with co-accused persons. 3. Heard Mr. Manas Kumar Chand, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Satpathy, learned Addl. PP in the matter and perused the record. 4. At the outset Mr. P. Satpathy, learned Addl. PP brings it to the notice of the Court that the present petitioner is allegedly involved in following cases:- (1) Baghamari PS Case No.35 of 2022 for commission of offences U/S.294/323/34 of IPC. (2) Baghamari PS Case No.57 of 2022 for commission of offences U/S.399/402 of IPC. (3) Baghamari PS Case No.17 of 2023 for offences U/S.21(b)/29 of NDPS Act. (4) Baghamari PS Case No.72 of 2023 for offences U/S.21(b)/29 of NDPS Act. p. 2 (5) Baghamari PS Case No.221 of 2023 for offences U/S.21(b)/29 of NDPS Act. 5. It is relevant here to state that although the petitioner is having above criminal antecedents, but he has not disclosed such criminal antecedents in his bail application which is a material suppression. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances and taking into account the materials so placed on record and regard being had to the involvement of the petitioner in above five criminal cases including three of similar nature, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. 6. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A soft copy of the order be immediately communicated to the learned trial Court. (G. Satapathy) Judge Jayakrushna