IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.12901 of 2024 Arabinda Bagha @ Arbinda Bag …. Petitioner Mr. M. Das, Advocate -versus- State of Orissa …. Opposite Party Mr. R.B. Dash, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 05.02.2025 02. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The Petitioner is an accused in connection with Special G.R. Case No.15 of 2023 pending on the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Padampur arising out of Padampur P.S. Case No.79 of 2023 for commission of offence alleged under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) & 25/29 of the NDPS Act. 3. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that in the case at hand, allegation against the Petitioner is that he along with co-accused are involved in transportation of contraband to the tune of 50 Kg.480 grams (ganja). It is submitted that charge sheet has already been filed on 11.09.2023 citing the Petitioner as an absconder and the basis of implication of the Petitioner is on account of co-accused statement. He has been remanded to custody on 03.12.2024. It is further submitted that two of accused persons arrested at the spot of occurrence i.e. Mukteswar Rana and Raju Bhuyan on the basis of the statements, the Petitioner was arraigned as an accused and have been released on bail vide order dated 12.10.2024 in BLAPL No.796 of 2024 and hence relying on the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Tofan Singh vrs. State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2020) 80 OCR (SC) 641, the Petitioner seeks for release on bail. 4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the bail order relating to the co-accused, Mukteswar Rana (supra) that this Court taking into account that the chemical examination report was not submitted along with the final form for the charge could not been directed release of the co- accused notwithstanding his antecedent 5. Learned Counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that, merely because of the release of the co-accused persons does not entitle the Petitioner to be released on bail. More so, keeping in view his criminal proclivity that he has involved in five cases all of similar nature. 6. Taking into account the release of the co- accused, the reason for directing their release being non-submission of chemical examination report because the Petitioner has the criminal antecedent, such benefit in the considered view of this Court cannot be denied to the Petitioner on the ground of parity (Satender Kumar Antil vrs. Central Bureau of Investigation & another, reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51) notwithstanding the bar contained under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act which has been adverted to by the learned Counsel for the State. 7. Accordingly, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin. 8. Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once every month on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin till conclusion of trial. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin and in addition to the sureties fixed, one of the immediate family member of the Petitioner shall execute a P.R. bond. 9. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. 10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per the rules. (V. NARASINGH) Judge Narayan