RAMESH NAYAK v. STATE OF ODISHA
Court: High Court of Orissa
Bench: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Orissa judgment dated 2025-12-22. RAMESH NAYAK v. STATE OF ODISHA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 13384 of 2025 Ramesh Nayak .. …... Petitioner (s) Mr. Mahes Das, Adv. -Versus- State of Odisha ………. Opposite Party Ms. Gayatri Patra, ASC CORAM: DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI ORDER 22. 12. 2025 Order No. 01. FIR/PR Dated Police Case No. and Sections No. Station Courts’ Name 128/2025- 05. 12. 2025 Raikia 2(a)CC Case Section No. 67/2025 20(b)(ii)(B) 26 arising out of of NDPS Raikia P. R. Act No. 128/2025- 2026 corresponding to pending in the court of learned Special Judge-cum-Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Balliguda 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Parties. 3. The petitioner is in custody in connection with 2(a)CC Case No. 67/2025 arising out of Raikia P. R. No. 128/2025-2026 corresponding to pending in the court of learned Special Judge-cum-Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Balliguda, has filed the present application seeking release on bail.
The case has been registered for alleged offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 4. The brief fact of the case is that on 05. 12. 2025, the O. I. C. of Excise, Raikia arrested the Petitioner and filed one P. R. No. 128 of 2025-26 against him with the allegation that he was transporting ganja of 10 Kg in a Honda Unicorn Motorcycle bearing Registration No. OD-07-W-6572 towards Bira Chhak. Then the excise Staffs seized the ganja along with the motorcycle. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had no knowledge of the transportation of the contraband ganja. It is contended that the petitioner has no connection whatsoever with the alleged offences as claimed by the prosecution. Furthermore, the petitioner has been in custody since 05. 12. 2025 and the final P. R. has already been submitted. Accordingly, it is prayed that the Petitioner be released on bail. 6.
Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the Petitioner. 7. Without entering into the merits of the case, and considering the facts and circumstances at hand, it is directed that the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case subject to stringent terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the learned court in seisin over the matter, 8. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Signature Not Verified Sumitra Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMITRA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 24-Dec-2025 17:31:24
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.