IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.3795 of 2026 Sukadeb Mondal & Ors. …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Dhananjaya Mund, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party(s) Miss Gayatri Patra, ASC CORAM: HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI Order No. 01. ORDER 06.05.2026 F.I.R. No. Dated Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name Sections 0283 10.10.2025 Athamallik Special (NDPS) Case No.24 of 2025 arising out of Athamallik P.S. Case No.283 of 2025 pending before the Court of learned Special Judge, Athamallik Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 & 29 of the NDPS Act 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 3. The Petitioners being in custody in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No.24 of 2025 arising out of Athamallik P.S. Case No.283 of 2025 pending before the Court of learned Special Judge, Athamallik registered for the alleged commission of offences under Sections Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-May-2026 19:18:55 Signature Not Verified 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 & 29 of the NDPS Act, have filed this application for their release on bail. 4. The brief fact of the case is that on 10.10.2025, during course of patrolling duty near Athamallik Police Station area, the I.I.C, Athamallik Police Station on getting credible information regarding illegal transportation of contraband ganja, detained car of the Petitioners on suspicion, which was parked at road side. On search, the Police personnel recovered 30.150 kilograms of contraband ganja from the said car. Since the Petitioners were there in the said car, they were taken into custody upon completion of investigation and all the formalities. The Petitioners have been languishing in custody since 10.10.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that nothing has been seized from the conscious possession of the present Petitioners. They were only travelling in the said car. The contraband ganja alleged to have been seized from the conscious possession of the present Petitioners does not belong to them. The Petitioners are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in this case. He, accordingly, prays for permitting the Petitioners to be released on bail. 6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the present Petitioners. She further Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-May-2026 19:18:55 Signature Not Verified contends that such type of offences is not tolerable in a law abiding society. She, accordingly, prays for dismissal of this BLAPL. 7. Considering the submissions made on behalf of both the parties, this Court finds that this petition centers on a plea for bail in a case involving the alleged possession and transportation of contraband Ganja. Under the NDPS Act, offences of this nature invoke a stricter threshold for bail. The Court is required to form a reasoned belief not only that the accused may be innocent but also that the likelihood of reoffending while on bail is minimal. 8. In evaluating bail for offences involving commercial quantities under the NDPS Act, the Court must look beyond isolated facts and assess the wider operational context. Such crimes often involve coordinated efforts among multiple individuals and cannot be understood in isolation. Therefore, a comprehensive analysis of the interconnected roles and circumstances surrounding the offence is essential. 9. It is well settled that bail jurisprudence under the NDPS Act, particularly for commercial quantities, is governed by a more stringent test. In the case of Union of India v. Ajay Kumar Singh @ Pappu1 the Supreme Court 1 2023 SCC OnLine SC 346 Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-May-2026 19:18:55 Signature Not Verified reiterated the stance that no person accused of trading commercial quantity of narcotics is liable to be released on bail unless Court is satisfied of reasonable grounds proving innocence. The relevant excerpts are produced below: “16. In view of the above provisions, it is implicit that no person accused of an offence involving trade in commercial quantity of narcotics is liable to be released on bail unless the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such an offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. 17. The quantity of “ganja” recovered is admittedly of commercial quantity. The High Court has not recorded any finding that the respondent-accused is not prima facie guilty of the offence alleged and that he is not likely to commit the same offence when enlarged on bail rather his antecedents are indicative that he is a regular offender. In the absence of recording of such satisfaction by the court, we are of the opinion that the High Court manifestly erred in enlarging the respondent-accused on bail.” 10. At the bail stage, the Court is not expected to determine the guilt of the accused. However, it must assess whether the material on record provides reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty. This includes a holistic consideration of all statements, documents, and evidence gathered during the investigation. Even if such material does not conclusively prove innocence, it cannot be dismissed Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-May-2026 19:18:55 Signature Not Verified outright, as doing so would undermine the legal standard set by Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 11. The Petitioner’s involvement, whether direct or peripheral, warrants full scrutiny at trial. Granting bail at this stage would risk a premature assessment of facts, which this Court is not inclined to undertake. 12. The Court is conscious that the Petitioners have spent considerable time in custody. But in cases under the NDPS Act involving commercial quantity, bail cannot be granted only on the basis of time spent. The law requires reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and will not commit a similar offence. That test is not met in the present case. 13. Accordingly, the BLAPL is dismissed. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Ayaskanta Designation: Personal Assistant