Aru @ Aruna Prusty And Another vs State Of Odisha

B. P. Routray, J

The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

Heard Mr. D. Panda, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Mr. K.K. Das, learned Additional Standing Counsel for Opposite Party - State.

The petitioners namely, Aru @ Aruna Prusty and Alekha Prusty have prayed for grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with Ghasipura P.S. Case No.51 of 2019 corresponding to S.T. Case No.42 of 2019 (G.R. (GN) Case No.92 of 2019) pending on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Anandapur for alleged commission of offences under Sections 302/201/120-B of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 25/27 of the Arms Act.

It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioners that they are inside custody since 28th March and 3rd April, 2019 respectively and in the meantime though 52 witnesses have been examined but the trial is yet to complete. It is further submitted that the witnesses have not stated about specific blows of assault dealt by the Petitioners on the deceased and the allegations are omnibus in nature.

Upon hearing both parties, it is seen from the rejection order of learned Additional Sessions Judge that the trial is at the verge of completion and 52 witnesses out of 57 charge-sheeted witnesses have been examined. The copies of depositions of P.W.1 to P.W.52 have been produced. Upon perusal of depositions of all such witnesses, particularly the eye-witnesses Viz., P.W.47 and P.W.48 and the brutality involved in commission of the offences, I am not inclined to release the Petitioners on bail. Accordingly the prayer for bail is rejected.

The BLAPL is dismissed.

…………………………