IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2438 of 2026 Vadalam Subbarao @ V. Subbarao …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Mangu Nandy, Adv. -versus- The State of Orissa …. Opposite Party(s) Mr. Sonak Mishra, ASC CORAM: HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI Order No. 01. ORDER 27.04.2026 F.I.R. No. Dated Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name Sections 0040 09.02.2026 Chitrakonda Special G.R. Case No.67 of 2026 arising out of Chitrakonda P.S. Case No.0040 of 2026 dated 09.02.2026 pending before the Court of learned Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge, Malkangiri Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) & 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 3. The Petitioner being in custody in connection with Special G.R. Case No.67 of 2026 arising out of Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 30-Apr-2026 16:30:17 Signature Not Verified Chitrakonda P.S. Case No.0040 of 2026 dated 09.02.2026 pending before the Court of learned Sessions Judge- cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri registered for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) & 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, has filed this application for his release on bail. 4. The brief fact of the case is that on 09.02.2026 at about 8.30 A.M., during course of patrolling duty the S.I. of Police, Chitrakonda Police Station on getting credible information regarding manufacturing of liquid Ganja by utilizing chemicals at Bedapadar village, rushed to the said area along with his other staffs. On reaching at the spot, they detained the present Petitioner including three other persons. On search, they seized on plastic bag, one plastic sack containing some suspicious articles, one machine installed on the top of the hill inside the jungle, accessories like pipes and pressure cooker connected to the machine being used for processing of contraband articles, one HP gas cylinder and four plastic drums. They also seized one bottle containing one kilogram of liquid ganja, one bottle containing two kilograms of liquid ganja/Hashish oil, one bag containing fifty kilograms of raw ganja and one bag containing thirty kilograms of contraband ganja. Accordingly, upon completion of investigation, the Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 30-Apr-2026 16:30:17 Signature Not Verified Petitioner was taken into custody. The Petitioner has been languishing in custody since 09.02.2026. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The above noted contraband articles do not belong to the present Petitioner. Nothing has been seized from the conscious possession of the present Petitioner. The ground of arrest has not been provided to the present Petitioner. He, accordingly, prays for permitting the Petitioner to be released on bail. 6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the present Petitioner. He further contends that such type of offences is not tolerable in a law abiding society. He, 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. Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 30-Apr-2026 16:30:17 Signature Not Verified 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 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 1 2023 SCC Online 346 Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 30-Apr-2026 16:30:17 Signature Not Verified 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 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 Petitioner has 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 Designation: Personal Assistant 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