Orissa High Court
ABLAPL/9566/2026 of MANAS RANJAN PANDA Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 19 August 2026
of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No. 9566 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010595972026 1. Manas Ranjan Panda 2. Gyana Ranjan Mallik …. Petitioners Mr. G. Behera, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. A.K. Pati, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ABLAPL No. 9566 of 2026
CNR No. ODHC010595972026
1. Manas Ranjan
Panda
2. Gyana Ranjan Mallik
….
Petitioners
Mr. G. Behera, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha
….
Opposite Party
Mr. A.K. Pati, ASC
CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
Order No.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
19.08.2026
01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
2. The Petitioners are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with G.R. Case No.36 of 2019 pending on the file of learned Special Judge, Parlakhemundi, arising out of Mohana P.S. Case No.76 of 2019 for commission of offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)C of the NDPS Act.
3. Admittedly, the Petitioner was before this Court when the matter was pending trial by filing anticipatory bail application, which was not entertained, taking into account that the accusation against the Petitioner is that he along with the co- accused are involved in the transportation of contraband (Ganja) to the tune of 77 kg 400 grams.
4. It is submitted that the co-accused have since been acquitted by the judgment dated 06.04.2024, inter alia, on the ground of infraction of statutory provisions.
5. Basing on the same, the Petitioners filed CRLMC No.3299 of 2024, which was disposed of by order dated 11.09.2024, giving liberty to the Petitioners to surrender and seek bail.
6. It is stated that the Petitioners have not availed such order for reasons best known.
7. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioners that notwithstanding the same, since the basis of implication is on account of the co- accused statement and keeping in view the judgment of acquittal in respect of the co-accused, from whose possession the contraband was seized, the Petitioners are entitled to be released on pre-arrest bail.
8. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail.
9. Considering the earlier order passed by this Court, this Court is not inclined to entertain the application for pre-arrest bail. However, in the event the Petitioners surrender before the learned Court in seisin in the aforesaid case and moves an application for their release on bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit and the learned Court in seisin is requested to make an endeavor to dispose of the same on the same day needless to state after following the due procedure of law and also shall take into account the judgment of acquittal as well as the judgment of this Court in the case of Bhabagrahi Digal vs. State of Odisha, (2026) 102 OCR-49.
10. Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of.
(V. NARASINGH)
Judge
Santoshi
Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTOSHI LENKA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 20-Aug-2026 20:57:49 Signature Not Verified