IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.10959 of 2025 Debananda Samal @ … Petitioner Debanand Samal Mr. P.S. Das, Advocate -versus-

State of Odisha … Opposite Party Mr. C. Mohanty, Addl. PP CORAM:

JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

ORDER(ORAL)

22.12.2025 Order No

02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

2. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Keonjhar Town PS Case No.380 of 2023 corresponding to Special Case No.36 of 2023 pending in the file of learned Special Judge, Keonjhar, for commission of offences punishable U/S.21(c) of NDPS Act, on the main allegation of possessing 516Grams of Brown Sugar.

3. Heard, Mr. Partha Sarathi Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. C. Mohanty, learned Additional Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record. 4. Bail to the petitioner is mainly sought for on the ground of delay in disposal of the case, but delay cannot be a ground to grant bail to a person accused of an offence under NDPS Act involving commercial quantity as held by the Apex Court in Union of India Vrs. Vigin K. Varghese; (2025) LiveLaw (SC) 1101, wherein the Apex Court while allowing an appeal of Union of India by setting aside the order of grant of bail to the accused therein has held thus:-

“17.The High Court then, on the strength of those premises, recorded a finding that there exist reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is not guilty of the alleged offence, treating prolonged incarceration and likely delay as the justification for bail. Such a finding is not a casual observation. It is the statutory threshold under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) which would disentitle the discretionary relief and grant of bail must necessarily rest on careful appraisal of the material available. A conclusion of this nature, if returned without addressing the prosecution’s assertions of operative control and antecedent involvement, risks trenching upon appreciation of evidence which would be in the domain of trial court at first instance”.

5. In view of the above and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioner vis-à-vis the allegation sought to be brought against him and regard being had to the seizure of 516Grams of Brown Sugar, which is well above the commercial quantity allegedly from the possession of the petitioner and his consequent failure to satisfy the conditions of Section 37 of NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. In view of the alternative oral prayer as advanced for the petitioner, trial be expedited, if there is no other legal impediment.

7. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the concerned Court. (G. Satapathy)

Judge Subhasmita Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA DAS Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 23-Dec-2025 11:32:45 Page 3 of 3