Bighneswar Bisoi vs State Of Odisha

A.K. Mohapatra, J

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party. Perused the materials placed before this Court.

The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail relating to Orkel P.S. Case No.154 of 2024, corresponding to G.R. Case No.181 of 2024, pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Kudumulugumma, for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 451, 294, 324, 307, 427, 506 of IPC.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is in custody since 09.04.2024. He also contended that the investigation has progressed substantially and the final charge-sheet is likely to be filed soon. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that as per allegation of the FIR, the informant, victim and the petitioner are related. Further it was contended that the informant is the mother and the victim is the father. It was also contended that due to a civil dispute the Petitioner has falsely implicated in the present case. It was also contended that the Petitioner does not have any criminal antecedent. He also submitted that the Petitioner belongs to locality there is no chance of absconding. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on any terms and condition which the Petitioner undertakes to abide by while on bail.

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that the allegations made in the FIR are serious in nature. It was further contended that the issue of a dispute in the family members, as a result of which the victim has sustained injuries. Learned counsel for the State opposed the release of the Petitioner in view of the nature and seriousness of allegation made against the Petitioner. Therefore, he submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected at this juncture.

Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on careful consideration of the surrounding facts as well as materials on record, and the period of custodial detention, and the fact that the Petitioner does not have any similar criminal antecedents, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter. Release of the Petitioner shall also be subject to following conditions:-

i) he shall not be involved in any offence of similar nature while on bail;

ii) he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or try to threaten or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever,

iii) he shall not make any default in attending the court during trial on each date without fail.

Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

It is open for the Court in seisin over the matter to impose any other conditions as may be deemed just and proper.

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner is subject to the condition that the court below shall verify whether the Petitioner is having any similar criminal antecedent. In the event it is found that the Petitioner is having similar any criminal antecedent, this bail order shall automatically stand revoked.

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

.....…………………………..