IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Lalu Ganda (In BLAPL No.9058 of 2025) Gobardhana Harijan (In BLAPL No. 9087 of 2025) Jitu @ Jiru Golori @ Jaru Galari (In BLAPL No. 11139 of 2025) … Petitioners Mr. R.L. Pattnaik, Advocate (In BLAPL No. 9058 of 2025) Mr. S.K. Tripathy, Advocate (In BLAPL No. 9087 of 2025) Mr. M. Nandy, Advocate (In BLAPL No. 11139 of 2025) -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. M.K. Mohanty, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL) 05.01.2026 04. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. Since these three bail applications arise out of one and same case record, the same are heard together and disposed of by this common order with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. These are the bail applications U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Special GR Case No. 73 of 2025 arising out of Mudulipada PS Case No. 59 of 2025 pending in the file of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri in the district of Malkangiri for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 20(b)(ii)(C)/27-A/29 of the NDPS Act, on the main allegation of transporting 110 Kgs of Contraband Ganja in a Maruti Swift Dzire VDI Car bearing Registration No. OD-30-0377. 4. In the course of hearing, Mr. Rajib Lochan Pattnaik, learned counsel for the Petitioner in BLAPL No. 9058 of 2025 submits that although the Petitioner was arrested on 18.05.2025 at 12:30 PM, but he was forwarded to the Court beyond 24 hours and, therefore, the Petitioner’s detention being illegal, he may kindly be granted bail. In addition Mr. Pattnaik also submits that the FIR is defective one, since in one part of the FIR, it is stated that the Petitioner-Gobardhana Harijan was travelling in the Car, but in other part, it has been stated that Gobardhana Harijan was escorting such Car on his Motor Cycle and this discrepancy enure to the benefit of the Petitioner. Accordingly, Mr. Pattnaik prays to grant bail to the Petitioner-Lalu Ganda. 4.1. On the other hand, Mr. Soumya Kanta Tripathy and Mr. Mangu Nandy, learned counsel for respective Petitioners, however, submit that neither any contraband article was recovered from their Petitioners nor they were found in conscious possession of any Contraband articles and the only allegation against the Petitioners were for escorting the Car carrying Contraband articles, but such fact remains to be established in the trial and, therefore, the Petitioners- Gobardhana Harijan & Jitu @ Jiru Golori @ Jaru Galari may kindly be granted bail. On being queried about the criminal antecedent of the petitioners, Mr. Tripathy & Mr. Nandy volunteer to withhold bail to the concerned petitioners, if he/they is/are found to have any criminal antecedent of similar nature for commission of offence under NDPS Act. 4.2. On the contrary, Mr. M.K. Mohanty, learned Addl. PP submits that not only the Petitioners were found in conscious possession of Contraband article, but also they have failed to satisfy the conditions of Sec. 37 of NDPS Act and, therefore, the bail application of the Petitioners may kindly be rejected. 5. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against the Petitioners for transporting 110 Kgs of Contraband Ganja in a Maruti Swift Dzire VDI Car bearing Registration No. OD-30-0377, but the Petitioners Gobardhana Harijan & Jitu @ Jiru Golori @ Jaru Galari were not the occupant of the Car nor any Contraband article was recovered from them, however, the Petitioner- Lalu Ganda was allegedly found to be an occupant of the Car carrying commercial quantity of Contraband Ganja. No doubt, it is advanced for the Petitioner Lalu Ganda that the mandate of Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India has not been complied with, but not a scrap of document has been produced nor it is established that the Petitioners were arrested at 12:30 PM on 17.05.2025 and forwarded to the Court after 24 hours of their detention. Further, no document was in fact produced to show as to when the accused- Lalu Ganda was produced before the concerned Court and such plea was not taken before the learned trial Court who is the competent Court to address such issue at the time of his forwarding. 6. In the aforesaid circumstance and taking into consideration the materials placed on record, this Court, however, does not find the Petitioner-Lalu Ganda to have satisfied the conditions of Sec. 37 of NDPS Act, but the Petitioners Gobardhana Harijan & Jitu @ Jiru Golori @ Jaru Galari are reasonably found to have satisfied the conditions of Sec. 37 of NDPS Act which is a sine qua non for grant of bail for commission of offence under NDPS Act involving commercial quantity. In view of the above facts and taking into consideration the pre trial detention of the Petitioners Gobardhana Harijan & Jitu @ Jiru Golori @ Jaru Galari in custody since 18.05.2025 with submission of charge sheet in the meantime, this Court while not being inclined to grant bail to the petitioner Lalu Ganda in BLAPL No. 9058 of 2025, considers it proper to admit the petitioners Gobardhana Harijan & Jitu @ Jiru Golori @ Jaru Galari to bail, but subject to verification of their criminal antecedents for similar nature. 7. Hence, the bail application of petitioner-Lalu Ganda in BLAPL No. 9058 of 2025 stands rejected, whereas the bail applications of the petitioners namely Gobardhana Harijan & Jitu @ Jiru Golori @ Jaru Galari in BLAPL Nos. 9087 & 11139 of 2025 are allowed and they are allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it. In view of the specific submission as advanced for the petitioners-Gobardhana Harijan & Jitu @ Jiru Golori @ Jaru Galari, the benefit of this order shall not be extended to the concerned petitioner(s), if he/they is/are found to have any criminal antecedent of similar nature for commission of offences under NDPS Act. 8. Accordingly, these BLAPL Nos. 9058; 9087 and 11139 of 2025 stand disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. (G. Satapathy) Judge Priyajit