Bhagaban Barik and Others vs Rabindra Sethi

L. Mohapatra, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioners and learned Counsel for the State. Perused the records.

The order dated 28.10.2006 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Nayagarh in I.C.C. No. 125 of 2006 taking cognizance of the offence under Sections 323, 294, 506(II) and 34 of the Penal Code read with Section 3 of the SC and ST (PA) Act is under challenge.

Shri Mishra, the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners submitted that initially an FIR was lodged and having found no prima facie case, Final Form was submitted. Cognizance was taken on a protest petition. On perusal of the impugned order, I do not find any reason to interfere with the same. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners prayed for bail. Since it is not permissible to grant bail in an application filed u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure. I direct that in the event the Petitioners surrender before the learned S.D.J.M., Nayagarh in the above mentioned complaint case and move for bail, the same shall be disposed of on the same day to enable the Petitioners to move the higher forum in the event of rejection. The case diary be made available to the concerned Court. The case diary, if necessary, shall be transmitted at the costs of the Petitioners. It is further directed that while considering the bail application of the Petitioners the Court shall bear in mind that Final Form had been submitted by the police after investigation and issuance of N.B.W. due to non-appearance of the Petitioners before the learned S.D.J.M., will not be a ground for rejection of the bail application.

The CRLMC is disposed of.

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