Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2214 of 2026 Bikash @ Akash Behera ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Dibya Jyoti Sahoo -versus- State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party Represented by Adv. – Mr. Mr. S.K. Parhi, ASC CORAM: 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. (N) Case No.109 of 2025, arising out of Phulbani Town P.S. Case No.334 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Special Judge-cum-Sessions Judge, Kandhamal for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act. 4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is languishing in custody since 03.09.2025. He further contended that as per the prosecution allegation the quantity of 28 Page 2 of 3. kgs. of contraband ganja was recovered from the possession of the present Petitioner. Such recovery from the possession of the Petitioner is seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the Petitioner on the ground that the same has not been recovered from the exclusive and conscious possession of the present Petitioner. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner objected to the applicability of the section 37 of the NDPS Act. He further submitted that the Petitioner does not have any criminal antecedent and he belongs to the locality. Therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. It was also contended that in the meantime, the investigation has been concluded and the final charge-sheet has been filed. 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 taking into consideration the fact that the investigation has been concluded and final charge sheet has been filed, that the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedent and the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not be attracted taking into consideration Page 3 of 3. the quantity of the contraband articles was seized, 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 in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty 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 Sisir Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT