Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Orissa/
  4. 2024/
  5. May

Premraj Seth vs. State of Odisha

Decided on 30 May 2024• Citation: BLAPL/5442/2024• High Court of Orissa
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                       IN THE HIGH  COURT  OF ORISSA  AT CUTTACK                  
                                   BLAPL  No.5442 of 2024                         
                                                .....                             
                  Premraj Seth                                  Petitioner        
                                                       Represented By Adv. -      
                                                       Suryakanta Dwibedi         
                                          -versus-                                
                                               .....                              
                  State Of Odisha                           Opposite Party        
                                                       Represented By Adv.        
                                                                     –            
                                                       J.P.Das, A.S.C.            
                                         CORAM:                                   
                        THE HON'BLE  MR.  JUSTICE ADITYA  KUMAR                   
                                      MOHAPATRA                                   
                                             ORDER                                
       Order No.                            30.05.2024                            
           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 439 of Cr.P.C.
                     has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection
                     with 2(a)CC  Case  No.2 of  2024 corresponding to P.R        
                     No.11/2024-25, pending in the Court of learned Additional    
                     Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Patnagarh for alleged      
                     commission of offence punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) 
                     of the N.D.P.S. Act.                                         
                     4.   Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that earlier this
                     matter was not before any of the bench of this Court. It is  
                                                                Page 1 of 3.      

                     submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the 
                     Petitioner is in custody since 20.04.2024. He further contended
                     that the investigation has progressed substantially. It is also
                     contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that keeping
                     in view the quantity of ganja seized, i.e., 17 Kg 700 gram, which
                     is less than the commercial quantity, a bar under Section 37 of
                     the N.D.P.S. Act is not attracted. He further submitted that the
                     Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedent. He 
                     further contended that the petitioner belongs to the locality,
                     therefore there is no chance of absconding. In such view of the
                     matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the
                     Petitioner be released on bail on any terms and condition which
                     the Petitioner undertakes to abide by while on bail.         
                     5.   Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the   
                     State-Opposite Party, on the other hand contended that the   
                     investigation is still on. He 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 considering the nature of allegation and the  
                     contraband used in the present case, the release of the petitioner
                     would be 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  
                                                                Page 2 of 3.      

                     further keeping the view the period of detention of the Petitioner
                     in jail custody and the fact that the Petitioner does not have any
                     similar criminal antecedent, 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.25,000/- 
                     (Rupees Twenty Five thousand) with two local solvent sureties
                     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.       
                     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, this bail order shall
                     automatically stand revoked.                                 
                     10.  The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.                 
                                                  ( A.K. Mohapatra)               
                                                   Vacation Judge                 
           Rubi                                                                   
      Signature Not Verified                                                      
                                                                Page 3 of 3.      
      Digitally Signed                                                            
      Signed by: RUBI BEHERA                                                      
      Reason: Authentication                                                      
      Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack                                     
      Date: 30-May-2024 19:57:54