SRIKANTA DHADAKA vs STATE OF ODISHA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

BLAPL No.6986 of 2026

CNR No. ODHC010468102026

(In the matter of application under Section 483 of the
BNSS ).

Srikanta Dhadaka Petitioner
…
-versus-

State of Odisha … Opposite Party


For Petitioner : Mr. S.K. Rout, Advocate

For Opposite Party : Mr. C. Mohanty, Addl. PP

CORAM:
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

DATE OF HEARING & DATE OF JUDGMENT:03.09.2026 (ORAL)


G. Satapathy, J.

1. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the
petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Pottangi PS Case
No.138 of 2025 corresponding to TR Case No.130 of 2025
pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Judge, Koraput for commission of offences punishable
under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act r/w Sec.25(1-B)(a) of
Arms Act, on the main allegation of transporting 51Kgs and
400grams of Contraband Ganja in a Ford Fiesta Car bearing
Regd. No.OR-02-BR-8908.
BLAPL No.6986 of 2026
Page 1 of 4

2. Heard Mr. Sangram Keshari Rout, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. C. Mohanty, learned Addl. PP in the matter and
perused the record.
3. Admittedly, the petitioner has taken the plea of non-
compliance of Sec.58 of BNSS r/w Art.22(2) of the Constitution
of India for not being produced before the magistrate within
twenty-four hours of his arrest excluding the time necessary for
journey from the spot to the Court of Magistrate. There is no
quarrel over the position of law that an accused cannot be
detained in custody beyond twenty-four hours without the
authority of the magistrate and such twenty-four hours exclude
the time necessary for journey from the place of arrest to the
Court of magistrate. On a careful perusal of the impugned order
in the present case, it is found that the learned Court in seisin
over the matter has excluded 1.10 hours towards time for
medical examination of the accused and 4.10 hours for the
journey from Pottangi PS to Court at Jeypore and accordingly,
calculated the detention of the accused-petitioner for 22.15hours.
4. Article 22(2) only provides for exclusion of time
necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Court of
magistrate and it does not provide any relaxation for the transit
of the accused-petitioner for medical examination. Even
BLAPL No.6986 of 2026
Page 2 of 4

otherwise, the time that has been considered by the learned trial
Court for taking the accused to the Court by leaving the Police
Station is 11.50AM, but the learned counsel for the petitioner has
produced the certified copy of the command certificate issued to
C/347 G. Khilo and OAPF/09 D. Badanaik for taking the accused-
petitioner to Court from police station of Pottangi and the time
superscribed therein is 2.00PM in the afternoon and thereby, the
calculation of the learned Court in seisin over the matter is
erroneous and on the basis of these admitted documents, if the
transit time of the accused-petitioner is considered, it should be
considered two hours since the accused-petitioner was allowed to
leave the police station at 2.00PM and he along with escort staff
reached the Court at 4.00PM and therefore, the detention of the
accused-petitioner would be 22.15hours + 2hours + 1.10hours
which would be 25.25hours and adding 15minutes time to it
which was not taken into consideration by the Court in seisin
over the matter, since the medical examination of the petitioner
was concluded at 11.35AM, but it is shown that the accused-
petitioner was taken to Court at 11.50AM, the total time of
detention of the accused-petitioner would come around
25.40hours. It is, therefore, as clear as noon day that the
BLAPL No.6986 of 2026
Page 3 of 4

accused-petitioner was not produced within 24hours and thereby,
his fundamental right has been violated.
5. Once fundamental right of an accused to be produced
before the Court of Magistrate within 24hours is violated, the
arrest would not only become illegal, but it would be vitiated and
the subsequent remand thereafter would also be vitiated. Once
the arrest and remand are vitiated, the only course left upon to
the Court is to grant bail to the accused.
6. In the result, the bail application of the petitioner stands
allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) only with two
solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of
the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and
conditions as deem fit and proper by it.
7 . Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. A soft copy of
this order be immediately communicated to the concerned Court,
who shall afterwards communicate the same to the concerned
Jail through e-mail for reference.


(G. Satapathy)

Judge



Orissa High Court, Cuttack,
rd
Dated the 03 Day of September, of 2026/ Jayakrushna
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: JAYAKRUSHNA DASH
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 03-Sep-2026 19:54:33
BLAPL No.6986 of 2026
Page 4 of 4