AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V. Narasingh, J
Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The Petitioner is an accused in connection with C.T(S) Case No.224 of 2022 pending on the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Talcher, arising out of Colliery P.S. Case No.431 of 2022 for commission of offence alleged under Sections-302/120-B of IPC.
Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. case is pending in any other Court.
Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Talcher by order dated 09.01.2024 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.
This is the second journey of the Petitioner to this Court. Earlier this Court did not entertain the bail application of the Petitioner by order dated 09.11.2023 in BLAPL No.6030 of 2023.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the case is primarily based on the own confession of the accused as per his disclosure statement pursuant to which ligature was discovered and while not entertaining his bail application in the earlier BLAPL adverted to hereinabove, leave was granted to renew his prayer after examination of the witnesses to such seizure under Section-27 of the Evidence Act, namely, Kartika Chandra Pattnaik(C.W.22) and Dhruba Charan Dhir(C.W.23).
It is submitted by the learned counsel that the said witnesses have been examined as P.W.6 and P.W.7 and they have not supported the prosecution.
It is further submitted by the learned counsel that an independent witness P.W.1 does not implicate the Petitioner and other independent witnesses P.Ws-2&3 have resiled. Hence, he seeks release of the Petitioner and also submits that the co-accused has since been released on bail by order dated 16.03.2023 by this Court in BLAPL No.158 of 2023.
Learned Standing Counsel Mr. Praharaj opposes the prayer and submits that there are other witnesses, whose statement clearly throw light on the motive to commit the offence and the manner in which the offence has been committed. So far as the release of the co-accused is concerned, it is stated that since she was a lady and had two minor children that weighed with this Court considering her bail application and that cannot be pressed into service as a ground to claim parity.
It is his further submission that during currency of trial, it is not open for this Court to scrutinize evidence.
Considering the nature of evidence on record qua the accusation vis-à-vis the Petitioner, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned court in seisin.
It is needless to state that this Court has not expressed any opinion regarding the complicity of the Petitioner which has to be adjudicated in the impending trial.
Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once every month on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin till the conclusion of trial. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin.
Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per the rules.
...………………………….