Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.3122 of 2026 Nirmala Karmi @ Nirmal Karmi ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. – Suryakanta Dwibedi -versus- State of Odisha ..... Opposite Party Represented by Adv. – U.C. Jena, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 23.04.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State- Opposite Party. Perused the materials placed before this Court. 3. The present bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection with C.T. Case No.86 of 2026, arising out of Chakapada P.S. Case No.17 of 2026, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge- cum-Addl. Dist. and Sessions Judge, Balliguda for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)B of the N.D.P.S. Act. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that Page 2 of 3. the Petitioner is in custody since 13.02.2026. He further contended that as per the F.I.R. allegation the quantity of ganja seized, i.e., 5 kgs., which was recovered from the conscious & exclusive possession of the Petitioner, which is less than the commercial quantity, a bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act is not attracted to the facts of the present case. He further submitted that the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedents. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on any terms and condition that would be imposed by this Court while the Petitioner release on bail. 5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party, on the other hand, opposed the release of the Petitioner on bail on the ground that in the event the Petitioner is released on bail, there is a possibility that he might be involved in similar criminal offences. Learned Additional Standing Counsel submitted that nature of allegation and the contraband used in the present case is itself a threat to the society. Therefore, he submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected at this juncture. 6. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the surrounding facts and circumstances of the present case and further keeping the view the period of detention of the Petitioner in jail custody and the fact that the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedent, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail subject to imposition of stringent conditions. 7. Hence, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail Page 3 of 3. in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter. 8. It is open for the Court in seisin over the matter to impose any other conditions as may be deemed just and proper. Violation of any of the conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail application. 9. It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner is subject to the condition that the court below shall verify whether the Petitioner is having any criminal antecedent of similar nature. In the event it is found that the Petitioner is having any similar criminal antecedent under the offences of NDPS Act, this bail order shall automatically stand revoked. 10. The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of. ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer