High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeBail granted

Ananta Kumar Sahoo, Basantha Kumar Sahoo and Krushna Chandra Barik v. State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:BAIL APPL. NO. 157 OF 2024

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • C. S. Dias
Judgment Date
2024-02-01
Court Decision / Holding
The bail application is allowed. The petitioners shall be released on bail on execution of a bond for Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, subject to the following conditions: (i) appearance before the Investigating Officer every Saturday for two months or until final report; (ii) refrain from any inducement or tampering with witnesses; (iii) not commit any offence while on bail; (iv) surrender or file an affidavit regarding passport; (v) not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the Kozhikode Sessions Division without permission; (vi) court may cancel bail on violation; (vii) applications to modify bail conditions; (viii) police may investigate and recover during bail as per Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) doctrine.
Final Disposition
Bail granted

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Ananta Kumar Sahoo
  • Basantha Kumar Sahoo
  • Krushna Chandra Barik

Respondents

  • State of Kerala, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • M. Devesh

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala

Case Synopsis & Summary

This Bail Application concerns three accused—Ananta Kumar Sahoo, Basantha Kumar Sahoo and Krushna Chandra Barik—arrested on 09.12.2023 in Crime No. 1040/2023 of Kasaba Police Station, Kozhikode, for alleged offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The contraband, 16.394 kilograms of ganja, was recovered near AAP School, Thalikulangara, Mankav Junction. The petition under Section 439 CrPC sought bail, contending innocence, false implication, lack of criminal antecedents, and the fact that the investigation was practically complete with recovery effected. The petitioners argued that the extent of the seized quantity constitutes intermediate quantity, and they would be entitled to default bail by 08.02.2024. Opposing the application, the Public Prosecutor argued that the respondents belong to Odisha and that release could enable flight and re-offending, given the magnitude of the seizure. After careful consideration of the evidence, the court noted the arrest date and the time spent in custody (approximately 56 days), the largely complete investigation, and absence of antecedents. It concluded that continued detention was unnecessary and allowed the bail, imposing stringent conditions designed to prevent tampering with witnesses and ensure appearance. The order also cites the Supreme Court's ruling in Sushila Aggarwal on conducting investigations and recoveries while bail is in effect.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Default Bail under CrPC
  • Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, 2020 (1) KHC 663 – principle permitting investigation/recoveries while bail is in place

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend they are innocent and have been falsely implicated. They have no criminal antecedents. They have been in judicial custody since 09.12.2023 (about 56 days). The contraband is of intermediate quantity. They argue that the investigation is practically complete and recovery has been effected; they would be entitled to default bail by 08.02.2024. Their continued detention is unnecessary, and bail should be granted with appropriate conditions.

Contentions of Respondents

The State submits that the petitioners were found in possession of 16.394 kilograms of ganja. They are from Odisha; there is a likelihood of flight and repetition of offences if released. Hence, bail should be refused.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another2020 (1) KHC 663PositiveCited as authority for the proposition that investigations and recoveries may proceed even while bail is in place.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Ananta Kumar Sahoo, Basantha Kumar Sahoo and Krushna Chandra Barik v. State of Kerala and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS** **THURSDAY, THE 1[ST] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 12TH MAGHA, 1945** ## **BAIL APPL. NO. 157 OF 2024** ## **CRIME NO.1040/2023 OF Kasaba Police Station, Kozhikode** ## **PETITIONER/S:** 1 ANANTA KUMAR SAHOO, AGED 35 YEARS S/O MATIA ,AHOO,BANAMALIPURPATANA,BANAMALIPURAPATANA NAYAGARH,ODISHA, PIN - 752077 2 BASANTHA KUMAR SAHOO, AGED 40 YEARS S/O MATIA SAHOO,BANAMALIPURPATANA,BANAMALIPURPATANA NAYAGARH,ODISHA, PIN - 752077 3 KRUSHNA CHANDRA BARIK, AGED 48 YEARS S/O SOURI BARIK,BANAMALIPURPATANA,BANAMALIPURPATANA FATEGARH NAYAGARH,ODISHA, PIN - 752077 BY ADV M.DEVESH ## **RESPONDENT/S:** STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 ## **OTHER PRESENT:** SR PP SMT NEEMA T V THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NO. 157 OF 2024 2 ## **O R D E R** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the accused 1 to 3 in Crime No.1040/2023 of the Kasaba Police Station, Kozhikode, registered against the petitioners (three in number) for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Secs.20(b)(ii)(B) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, the Act). The petitioners were arrested on 09.12.2023. 2. The gist of the prosecution case is that: around 6.45 hours on 09.12.2023, the accused were found in possession of 16.394 kilograms of ganja near the AAP School, Thalikulangara near Mankav junction, Kozhikode. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences. 3. Heard; Sri.M.Devesh, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt.Neema T.V., the learned Public Prosecutor. BAIL APPL. NO. 157 OF 2024 3 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are totally innocent of the accusations leveled against them. They have been falsely implicated in the crime. The petitioners have no criminal antecedents. The petitioners are law abiding citizens. The petitioners have been in judicial custody since 09.12.2023 which is nearly 56 days. The contraband that has been seized is of intermediate quantity. The petitioners would be entitled to default bail by 08.02.2024. The investigation in the case is practically complete and the recovery has been effected. The petitioners' continued detention is unnecessary. Hence, the application may be allowed. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She contended that the petitioners were found in possession of 16.394 kilograms of ganja. The BAIL APPL. NO. 157 OF 2024 4 petitioners belong to the State of Odisha. If the petitioners are enlarged on bail, there is every likelihood of them fleeing from justice and also committing similar offences. Hence, the application may be dismissed. 6. On an analysis of the materials placed on record, particularly taking note of the fact that the petitioners were arrested on 09.12.2023 which is nearly 56 days, that the investigation in the case is practically complete, that recovery has been effected, that the petitioners' have no criminal antecedents, that the contraband is of intermediate quantity and the petitioners will be entitled to default bail on 08.02.2024, I am of the definite view that the petitioners' continued detention is unnecessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail application, but subject to stringent conditions: BAIL APPL. NO. 157 OF 2024 5 In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioners to be released on bail on them executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions: - (i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of two months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier. They shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required; - (ii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; BAIL APPL. NO. 157 OF 2024 6 - (iii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while they are on bail; - (iv) The petitioners shall surrender their passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If they have no passport, they shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond; - (v) The petitioners shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the Kozhikode Sessions Division without previous permission of the jurisdictional court. The petitioners shall furnish their present address and mobile numbers to the Investigating Officers. - (vi) In case of violation of any of the conditions - mentioned above, the jurisdictional court - shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in BAIL APPL. NO. 157 OF 2024 7 accordance with law. - (vii) Applications for deletion/modification of - the bail conditions shall be filed and entertained before the court below. - (viii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioners even while the petitioners are on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another** [2020 (1) KHC 663]. sd/- **C.S.DIAS JUDGE** rkc/01.02.24 BAIL APPL. NO. 157 OF 2024 8 ## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 157/2024** PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF FIR AND FIS IN CRIME NO 1040/2023 ON THE FILES OF KASABA POLICE STATION KOZHIKODE