p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No.3022 of 2026 Sritam Urma …. Petitioner Mr. T.K. Mohanty, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. S. K. Lenka, ASC CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 24.04.2026 01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. Instant petition has been filed under Section 482 BNSS by the petitioner seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Baunsuni P.S. Case No.15 of 2026 corresponding to Special Case (NDPS) No. 27 of 2026 pending in the court of learned District & Sessions-Cum-Special Judge, Boudh on the grounds stated. 3. Perused the FIR as at Annexure-1. The said report reveals that there is recovery of commercial quantity of contraband Ganja. But Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is not involved in such illicit transportation, which was being carried out and found in an autorickshaw. Referring to the FIR, it is further submitted that at the relevant point of time, the petitioner was not travelling in the autorickshaw, rather, in a motorcycle as a pillion rider and was stopped by the police nearly half an hour before the alleged interception. The submission is that the p. 2 recovery is from the autorickshaw with which the petitioner is not connected, as it was seized from the physical possession of its driver, hence, considering the same, he should be allowed to go on bail with any conditions, which is opposed by learned counsel for the State on the ground that the FIR suggests his involvement as well and it relates to an incident during which 42 Kgs and 800 grams of contraband Ganja was recovered. On being asked, it is informed to the Court by Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel that the petitioner does not have any similar antecedent. This Court on a reading of the FIR finds that the seizure has been made from an autorickshaw. Admittedly, the petitioner was not travelling in the autorickshaw when it was intercepted. The FIR further reveals that after about half an hour, the autorickshaw arrived at the spot and the recovery of Ganja was made from it. Considering the facts narrated in the FIR and submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties, this Court, in absence of any such recovery shown against the petitioner and when it was made from an autorickshaw, is inclined to direct him to surrender before the learned court below instead for being released with conditions, though a case for pre-arrest bail is not made out. 4. Accordingly, it is ordered. 5. In the result, the ABLAPL petition stands disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to surrender before learned District & Sessions-Cum-Special Judge, Boudh within a fortnight from today and in the event, he surrenders in compliance thereof, shall be released on bail in connection with p. 3 Special Case (NDPS) No. 27 of 2026 arising out of Baunsuni P.S. Case No.15 of 2026 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (rupees forty thousand) with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court below, which shall be at liberty to impose such other suitable conditions as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case besides the following, such as, he shall report the I.O. for the purpose of investigation as and when summoned. The above order, as is further directed, shall not be given effect to if the learned court below finds any similar antecedent against the petitioner. 6. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules. (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge Balaram Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT