IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.506 2026 Pramod Kumar Tandi @ Tuna … Petitioner Dr. S. Ranjit, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. P. Satpathy, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER(ORAL):10.03.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. This is the 2nd bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Kesinga PS Case No.240 of 2021 corresponding to CT Case No.35 of 2021 pending in the file of learned Judge- cum-Special Judge, Kalahandi at Bhawanipatna, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of NDPS Act, on the allegation of possessing 251Kgs 960Grams of Contraband Ganja in the house of co- accused Sashibhusan Tandi. 3. Heard, Dr. Simanchalla Ranjit, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Satpathy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record. 4. After having considered rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against the petitioner for possessing 251Kgs 960Grams of Contraband Ganja, which is well above the commercial quantity in the house of co-accused Sashibhusan Tandi, but law is well settled that grant or refusal of bail for commission of offence under NDPS Act involving commercial quantity is governed by Section 37 of NDPS Act, which prescribes that no person accused of an offence under NDPS Act involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail, where the public prosecutor opposes such bail application of the accused; unless the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. It is, however, found from the impugned order that the petitioner is allegedly having criminal antecedent, which has neither been denied nor disclosed by the petitioner in the bail application, but one of the stipulation as contained in Section 37 of NDPS Act is unlikelihood of an accused committing any offence while on bail and the criminal antecedent alleged against the petitioner in itself is an impediment to record satisfaction of conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act. In the aforesaid facts and circumstance and taking into account the failure of the petitioner to satisfy the conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 5. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the learned Court in seisin over the matter for reference. The learned trial Court is, however, requested to complete the trial as early as possible. (G. Satapathy) Judge Subhasmita Designation: Sr. Stenographer