[ad_1]
Orissa High Court
Mangu Khinbudi And Another vs State Of Odisha ….. Opposite Parties on 16 April, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ABLAPL No.3765 of 2025
Mangu Khinbudi and another ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Rabindranath Barik
-versus-
State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties
Mr. S. K. Parhi, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
16.04.2025
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Addl.
Standing Counsel for the State. Perused the records.
3. This is an application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. filed by the
Petitioners for anticipatory bail, involving offence punishable under
Sections147, 148, 341, 294, 183, 186, 353, 506 & 149 of IPC read
with Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 29 of NDPS Act in G.R. Case No.118 of
2023 of the Court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge,
Malkangiri, arising out of Chitrakonda P.S. Case No.71 of 2023.
4. It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioners that the
Petitioners have not been named in the FIR. He further contended
that since the Police are searching for the Petitioners in connection
Page 1 of 3.
with the present criminal case, the Petitioners approached this Court
by filing the present bail application for their released on pre-arrest
bail. Learned counsel for the Petitioners further contended that
although the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act has
been added to the FIR, however, nothing has been recovered from
the exclusive and conscious possession of the present Petitioners. He
further submitted that while the Police leading party was proceeding
to the spot to seize the contraband ganja, the villagers prevented
them to discharge their duties, as a result of which the FIR has been
registered against number of persons. However, no specific role has
been assigned to the present petitioners in the FIR. He further
contended that one of the co-accused persons, who stand in a similar
footing, has already been released on regular bail in BLAPL
No.10848 of 2024 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order
dated 13.03.2025. On such ground, learned counsel for the
Petitioners contended that the Petitioners be enlarged on anticipatory
bail.
5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand objected to the
release of the Petitioners on pre-arrest bail on the ground that the
allegations are grave and serious in nature. He further contended that
a group of villagers prevented the Police party to discharge their
duties. He further contended that the investigation is still on. In the
event the Petitioners are released on pre-arrest bail, it would
adversely affect the investigation.
6. Considering the submissions made by the parties, it is
observed that the Petitioners, if so advised, may surrender before the
learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri, in the
aforesaid case within four weeks from today. In the event the
Page 2 of 3.
Petitioners surrender and move for bail within the aforesaid period,
learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri, shall do
well to dispose of the bail application of the Petitioners on the same
day on merit in accordance with law. Further, while considering the
bail application of the Petitioners, learned Court in seisin over the
matter shall keep in view the bar under section 37 would not attract
to the facts of the present case. The case diary be made available to
the concerned court to facilitate disposal of the bail application of
the Petitioners.
7. The ABLAPL is disposed of accordingly.
8. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
S.K. Rout
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANTANU KUMAR ROUT Page 3 of 3.
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 16-Apr-2025 18:19:10
[ad_2]
Source link