IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 2030 of 2026 Ranjan Kuanr …. Petitioner Mr. B.K. Ragada, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. C.R. Swain, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 08.05.2026 02. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The Petitioner is an accused in connection with T.R. Case No.55/13 of 2025-26 pending on the file of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Sambalpur, arising out of Sambalpur Town P.S. Case No.142 of 2025 for commission of offence alleged under Sections 21(C)/29 of NDPS Act. 3. Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. case is pending in any other Court. 4. Being aggrieved by the rejection of their application for bail U/s.483 of the BNSS by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sambalpur by order dated 10.02.2026 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed. 5. The allegation against the present Petitioner is that he along with the co-accused were found to be in possession of contraband (cough syrup) to the tune of 5011 bottles each containing 100ml of Codeine Phosphate, as such the Codeine Phosphate being 10.02 kgs. 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner is in custody since 05.05.2025 and since the co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court vide common order dated 16.12.2025 in BLAPL Nos.11959, 12202, 12576, 12632 and 12744 of 2025, the Petitioner may be released on bail, inter alia, on the ground of parity. 7. Learned counsel for the State opposes such prayer for bail in view of the rigors contained in Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act and submits that filing of the very charge sheet is an indication that there is prima facie case and so far as the second limb is concerned, it is submitted that the Petitioner also incurs the disqualification in view of the four criminal antecedents, including one which is of similar nature. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the Petitioner referring to the report of the learned Trial Court submits that though the Petitioner is in custody since 05.05.2025 for more than a year, there is no progress in trial and it is borne out from the report submitted by the learned Court in seisin that the matter is posted to 15.05.2026 for hearing on the point of charge. Hence, on the ground of procrastination of trial, the Petitioner seeks release. 9. Learned counsel for the State referring to the recent dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Debendra Nath Padhi, (2005) 1 SCC 568 submits that the delay cannot be a ground to ignore the rigors of Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act. This Court finds force in the submission of the learned counsel for the State, but at the same time it is trite that the judgments and orders passed cannot be relied upon bereft of the factual matrix of the case. 10. Considering the nature of allegations, the quantity of contraband and that the Petitioner is in custody for more than a year and charge is yet to be framed, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin so as to ensure his presence during the trial. 11. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. U.C.C as per rules. (V. NARASINGH) Judge Jina