IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.4895 of 2025 Anirudha barik @ Raja ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. –

Mr. Devashis Panda -versus-

State Of Odisha ..... Opp. Party Represented By Adv. –

Mr. B.K. Sahu, AGA CORAM:

MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

24.11.2025 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 application as well as the prayer made therein.

3. The present application has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS thereby challenging the order dated 12.08.2025 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Bhubaneswar in Criminal Misc. Case No.151 of 2024 which arises out of Khandagiri P.S. Case No.472 of 2024 and corresponds to T.R. Case No.400 of 2024. The above noted case was registered for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that at the time of occurrence a mobile phone and a motor bike was seized from the possession of the present Petitioner. He further contended that an application was moved under section 503 of the BNSS, 2023 to release the seized vehicle as well as the mobile phone which stands registered in the name of the present Petitioner as owner thereof. He further contended that by virtue of the impugned order dated 12.08.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Case No.151 of 2024, the learned First Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge, Bhubaneswar has rejected the petition to release the vehicle mechanically without considering the fact that the Petitioner is the owner of the vehicle which has been seized. He further contended the Petitioner is ready and willing to produce the vehicle when the same is required during trial.

5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand supported the impugned rejection order dated 12.08.2025 passed by the learned trial Court. In course of argument, learned counsel for the State contended that the Petitioner was arrested in connection with a case punishable under Section 21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act. She further submitted that taking into consideration the seriousness and gravity of the allegation, the learned trial Court has rightly rejected the prayer of the Petitioner as there is every likelihood that in the event the seized vehicle is released in favour of the Petitioner, the same is likely to be used in similar nature of offences. In view of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the State contended that the impugned rejection order does not suffer from any illegality. Accordingly, the present application is devoid of merit and the same should be dismissed.

6. Having heard the learned counsels for the respective Parties on careful examination of the impugned order dated 12.08.2025 passed by the learned trial Court on an application filed by the accused-Petitioner under Section 503 of the BNSS, 2023 with a prayer to release the seized mobile phone and the vehicle, this Court found that the learned trial Court has rejected the same on two grounds; firstly, one that the vehicle would be required during trial and secondly, there is a possibility of vehicle being used in a crime of similar nature.

7. On a close scrutiny of the order dated 12.08.2025, this Court found that the learned trial Court has not referred to the judgment of this Court by a Division Bench in Asish Ranjan Mohanty vs. State of Odisha reported in 2022 SCC Online Ori 510 as well as the SOP issued by this court in the aforesaid context by disposing of the application of the Petitioner.

8. In view of the aforesaid position, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 12.08.2025 and hence the same is hereby set aside. Further, the matter is remanded back to the learned trial Court to reconsider the application in the light of the law laid down by this Co