ORISSA HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON BISHNU @ BHISMA KHARA V/S STATE OF ODISHA

CUTTACK, India, June 12 -- Orissa High Court issued the following order on May 12:

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner being in custody in connection with Spl. G.R. Case No.68 of 2023 arising out of Orkel P.S. Case No.72 of 2023, pending in the court of the learned Sessions Judge- cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri, registered for the alleged commission of offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS ACT, has filed this petition for his release on bail.

3. The brief fact of the case is that the SI of the police of the Orkel P.S. lodged a written report alleging that some persons were illegally transporting the huge quantity of ganja from Malkanagiri area to other place. They ware staging the same inside the jungle and waiting for the vehicle there. The informant along with his staff immediately proceeded to the spot. On seeing them, the accused persons fled from the spot. However, they were able to apprehend other two co-accused persons. But, another one named Samara Madkami fled from the spot. The accused persons who were arrested from the spot disclosed the name of the present Petitioner from whom they had procured the ganja. Thereafter, the informant maintaining the official formalities and procedure seized 149 kg of the ganja from the spot in presence of the witnesses. Hence, this case.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that nothing has been seized from the conscious possession of the present Petitioner. He further submits that the Petitioner is in custody since 04.05.2023. Hence, he submits that, the prayer of the present Petitioner may be allowed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has consistently held that the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right guaranteed to every citizen under Article 21 of the Constitution. Therefore, continued incarceration of the petitioner for an extended period without conclusion of trial is unjustified and amounts to a violation of his fundamental rights. The importance of speedy trial has been emphasized in the case of Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. vs Home Secretary, State of Bihar, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has iterated that:

7. He further argues that the period of long incarceration suffered, which entitle the Petitioner for grant of bail. Right to Speedy trial is a fundamental right of an under trial prisoner and this observations have been resonated, time and again, in several judgments including that of Kadra Pahadiya & Ors. v. State of Bihar 1wherein it has been held that the obligation of the State or the complainant, as the case may be, to proceed with the case with reasonable promptitude. Particularly in a country like ours, where a significant majority of the accused belong to economically and socially disadvantaged sections of society and often lack awareness of legal rights or access to competent legal assistance, the right to a speedy trial assumes even greater importance. While in a given case, an accused person's express demand for a speedy trial may weigh in their favour, the absence of such a demand cannot be used to deny or dilute their right. An accused cannot be deprived of the protection guaranteed under the right to a speedy trial merely because they did not expressly assert or insist upon it.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.