CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Bhuban Mohan Dash & Another vs State Of Odisha

Orissa High Court · Decided on 29 April 2024 · Citation: (2024) 04 OHC CK 0287

HON’BLE JUDGES
V. Narasingh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 201, 302
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 547 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

14 paragraphs · 348 words

V. Narasingh, J

1.

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

2.

The Petitioners are accused in S.T. Case No.11 of 2023 pending on the file of learned District & Sessions Judge, Keonjhar, arising out of Keonjhar Sadar P.S. Case No.397 of 2022, for commission of alleged offence under Sections 302/201/34 IPC.

3.

Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioners relating to the aforementioned P.S. case is pending in any other Court.

4.

Being aggrieved by the rejection of their application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar by order dated 18.12.2023 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

5.

This is the second journey of the Petitioner No.1 (Bhuban Mohan Das) to this Court. Earlier bail application of the said Petitioner was rejected by order dated 18.01.2023 in BLAPL No.11790 of 2022.

6.

This is the third journey of the Petitioner No.2 (Bibhutibhusan Dash) to this Court. Earlier bail applications of the said Petitioner were rejected by orders dated 03.01.2023 & 28.03.2023 in BLAPL No.11283 of 2022 & BLAPL No.2375 of 2023 respectively.

7.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that since in the meanwhile seven witnesses have been examined and taking into account the evidence on record, further continuance of the Petitioners in custody is unwarranted.

8.

Such submission is opposed by the learned counsel for the State referring to the statement of witnesses inter alia one Naresh Kumar Mahanta-C.W.8. Admittedly the said witness has not been examined.

9.

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the State that other material witnesses are yet to be examined.

10.

Perused the statement of C.W.8. And, on consideration of the same, this Court is not inclined to entertain this bail application of the Petitioners at this stage.

11.

Liberty is granted to the Petitioners to renew their prayer before the learned Court in seisin at a later stage after examination of material witnesses.

12.

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of..

………………………..