Anil Sundhi & Another vs State Of Odisha

G. Satapathy, J

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

This is an application U/S.439 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Talcher P.S. Case No. 902 of 2022 corresponding to C.T.(S) Case No. 44 of 2023 pending in the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Talcher for commission of offences punishable under Section 376(1)/376-D/506 of IPC read with Section 66(d)/67 of I.T. Act on the main allegation of committing Gang Rape upon the victim along with co-accused persons and capturing some inappropriate photographs of the victim at the time of occurrence to get it viraled.

In the course of hearing of the bail application, Mr. S.S.Satapathy, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although there is allegation against the petitioners for committing sexual offence against the victim, but the victim had refused to undergo medical examination and there is absolutely no allegation against the petitioners for capturing inappropriate photographs of the victim and getting it viraled. It is further submitted that one of the co-accused namely, Sarasingh Digi has been granted bail, but he could not clarify which Court and in which bail application, the said accused was granted bail. It is, however, pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners from the record in C.T. Case No. 44 of 2023 that co-accused Sarasingh Digi is on bail. On the above submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners prays to grant bail.

On the other hand, Mr. S.S.Pradhan, learned AGA while strongly opposing the bail application of the petitioners submits that co-accused was probably granted bail because his name does not figure in the FIR and there is no materials to suggest that the victim had refused to undergo medical examination. It is further objected by the learned AGA by taking this Court to the material allegations placed on record.

After having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of accusations raised against the petitioners and keeping in view the fact that the case record has already been committed to the Court of Session in the meantime and there being no dispute about submission of charge sheet against the petitioners for offence U/Ss. 376(1)/376-D/506 of IPC read with Section 66(E)/67(A) of I.T. Act and on going through the materials placed on record, particularly the statement of the victim, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioners stand rejected.

It is, however, directed that the petitioners may renew their prayer for bail after examination of the victim and the doctor and in that event, the bail application of the petitioners shall be considered in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.

………………………….