Anil Kumar Mantri vs State Of Odisha

A.K. Mohapatra, J

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party. Perused the materials placed before this Court.

The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail relating to Keonjhar Sadar P.S. Case No.66 of 2024, corresponding to Special Case No.43 of 2024, pending before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge under POCSO Act, for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 376(1) of IPC read with Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is in custody since 08.01.2024. He also contended that the investigation has been completed and the final charge-sheet has been filed. Further referring the allegation made in the FIR, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that initially the case was registered under Section 376(1) of IPC read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act. Thereafter, conclusion of the investigation charge-sheet has been filed under Section 354-A of IPC read with Section 10 of POCSO Act. Learned counsel for the Petitioner has filed a certified copy of order dated 25.04.2024 passed in Special Case No.06 of 2024. On perusal of the order, it appears that the charge has been framed against the Petitioner for commission of offence punishable under Section 354-A of IPC read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the Petitioner is a teacher of the school and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It was also contended that the Petitioner is likely to be retired in the next month. Further, it submitted that since the Petitioner belongs to locality there is no chance of absconding. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on any terms and condition which the Petitioner undertakes to abide by while on bail.

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that the allegations made in the FIR are serious in nature. It was further contended that the Petitioner being a teacher of the school has misbehaved with a girl student of the school. Learned counsel for the State opposed the release of the Petitioner in view of the nature and seriousness of allegation made against the Petitioner. Therefore, he submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected at this juncture.

Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on careful consideration of the surrounding facts as well as materials on record, further taking note of factum of the charge made under Section 354-A of IPC read with Section 10 of POCSO Act, and the period of custodial detention, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand) with one local solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter. Release of the Petitioner shall also be subject to following conditions:-

i) he shall not be involved in any offence of similar nature while on bail;

ii) he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or try to threaten or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever,

iii) he shall not make any default in attending the court during trial on each date without fail.

Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

..…………………………..