CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Arabinda Naik vs State Of Orissa

Orissa High Court · Decided on 2 May 2024 · Citation: (2024) 05 OHC CK 0026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Savitri Ratho, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 279, 353, 379, 395, 399, 402, 406, 420, 465, 468 · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25, 27
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 2004 Of 2024
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 480 words

V. Narasingh, J

1.This is the second application of the petitioner under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with Parjang P.S. Case No. 386 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 504 of 2023, pending in the file of the learned J.M.F.C., Parjang under Section 395 of IPC read with Sections 25/ 27 of the Arms Act.

2.

This matter has been listed before me as BLAPL No. 12764 of 2023 filed by one Susanta Samal had been disposed of by me on 14.11.2023.

3.

The earlier application BLAPL No. 13549 of 2023 of the petitioner had been dismissed on 02.01.2024 granting liberty to him to move for bail afresh after completion of investigation.

4.

Thereafter the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected on 12.02.2024 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamakhyanagar in BLAPL No. 32 of 2024.

5.

The prosecution allegations against the petitioner is that on10.09.2023 while the vehicle (tipper) of the informant was going from Daitari mines to Jindal plant loaded with iron ore, near Saranga gate one tyre got punctured. While the driver was changing the tyre near the road, the accused persons reached the spot in a car bearing Registration No. OD-02AP-2125 armed with sword and pistol, assaulted the driver and took the tipper along with the driver to the jungle. They left the driver inside the jungle and took away the sim card from his cell phone and the vehicle. The present petitioner was arrested with great difficulty after his mobile number was tracked by the Police. The case diary reveals that the petitioner has 3 criminal antecedents which are under Sections 379, 34 of IPC i.e. (i) Talcher P.S. Case No. 21 of 2020 under Sections 279, 379, 420, 465, 468 and 34 of IPC, (ii) Talcher P.S. Case No. 23 of 2020 under Sections 379, 406, 420 of IPC, (iii) Talcher P.S. Case No. 67 of 2020 under Sections 353, 399 and 402 of IPC.

6.

Mr. J.K. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 11.09.2023 and as investigation has been completed, he may be released on bail.

7.

Mr.  S.S.  Mohapatra,  learned  Additional  Standing  Counsel opposes the prayer for bail stating that the stolen vehicle is yet to be recovered and as the petitioner has criminal antecedents and co-accused persons are yet to be arrested, he may not be released on bail.

8.

Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioner, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail at this stage. The prayer for bail is rejected.

9.

BLAPL is accordingly dismissed.

10.

It is open to the petitioner to move for bail afresh after examination of the driver of the tipper and informant or in case there is undue delay in their examination.

11.

Urgent  certified  copy  of  this  order  be  granted  on  proper application..

.……………………………