Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
G.SATAPATHY
Jitu Nayak – Appellant
Versus
State of Orissa – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
G. Satapathy, J.
1. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with PR No.282 of 2024-2025 corresponding to TR Case No.30 of 2025 pending in the file of learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge under NDPS Act, Khurda for commission of offences punishable U/S.20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, on the main allegation of transporting 929 Kgs of Contraband Ganja in a Tata ACE Vehicle and a Motor Cycle.
2. In the course of hearing, Mr. Devashis Panda, learned counsel for the Petitioner by placing the facts submits that since the Contraband article was allegedly found from the Petitioner being carried in an air bag on a Motor Cycle ridden by him, the Investigating Officer should have complied with the provision of Sec. 50 of the NDPS Act, but the IO has not complied with the provision of Sec. 50 of NDPS Act. Mr. Panda further submits about non-compliance of Sec. 52(A) of the NDPS Act and thereby, the benefit thereon should enure to the Petitioner. Mr. Panda further submits that since Contraband article in question was transported on a Motor Cycle and detained by the IO, the Petitioner should not have been detained without a
The court denied bail based on the substantial quantity of contraband exceeding commercial threshold and the petitioner's failure to meet Sec. 37 conditions under the NDPS Act.
Under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail involving commercial quantities can only be granted if the accused shows reasonable doubt of guilt, which the petitioner failed to demonstrate.
The court emphasized that bail cannot be granted under the NDPS Act for commercial quantity offences unless conditions for non-guilt and lack of re-offending are satisfied, which were not met by the ....
Point of Law : It is pertinent to note that in the bail application the appellants, it was alleged, that there was serious violation of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. In the impugned order nothing is st....
Point of Law- It is pertinent to note that in the bail application the appellants, it was alleged, that there was serious violation of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. In the impugned order nothing is sta....
The court determined that the conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act must be satisfied for granting bail in cases related to commercial quantities of drugs, emphasizing the significance of previ....
The mandatory nature of Section 50 of the NDPS Act and the negative attitude towards granting bail in cases of recovery beyond commercial quantity under Section 37 are central legal principles establ....
The legal principle established is that adherence to procedural safeguards during arrest is essential, but failure to satisfy conditions mandated by Section 37 of the NDPS Act prevents bail in cases ....
The violation of procedural safeguards under Section 50 of the NDPS Act can lead to the granting of bail, even in cases involving commercial quantities of contraband.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
