Binash Behera vs State Of Orissa

 R.K. Pattanaik, JÂ

This matter is taken up through video conferencing mode.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned  counsel for the State.Â

 3. This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner for bail in connection with Jharpokharia P.S. Case No.211 of 2021

corresponding to C.T. Case No.2174 of 2021 pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Baripada on the grounds stated therein.Â

 4. Perused the F.I.R. and the impugned order dated 11.10.2021.  Â

 5. Gone through the contents of the F.I.R. which reveals that on the date of occurrence, the informant and other officials

received information from reliable source about congregation of some miscreants at a place with a plan to commit dacoity in the locality and

accordingly, he and others rushed and reached at the spot and nabbed the petitioner and two other accused persons, who allegedly admitted about the

planning and then, incriminating materials, such as, knife etc. besides two live bombs were recovered and thereafter, forwarded them to the court and

in that connection, Jharpokharia P.S. Case No.211 was registered.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present accused is a local man and does not have any criminal antecedent of similar nature

excepting one case registered under Section 498-A IPC and admittedly, he was nabbed at the spot along with two others but then considering the

period of detention since 26. 9.2021, he should be enlarged on bail, which is objected to by the learned counsel for the State on the ground that the

materials on record well proved his involvement from whom two live bombs were recovered and said to have been seized by the local police.

The F.I.R. reveals congregation and presence of the petitioner and two other accused persons, who were nabbed at the spot by the police before

whom they said to have disclosed the plan to commit dacoity in the local area. Admittedly, number of incriminating materials, such as, plastic bottle,

knifes, beer bottle, iron rods with two live bombs shown to have been recovered from the spot. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the

accused is not having any criminal track record being involved in similar incident except a matrimonial dispute for which a case under Section 498-A

has been registered. The investigation is still in progress. Of course, the petitioner was apprehended at the spot with two others but seems having no

previous antecedent.

Having regard to the above facts and detention of the petitioner for the last three and half months and as substantial part of investigation appears to

be over, inasmuch as, all the incriminating materials shown to have been recovered and seized at the spot itself, the Court is inclined to release the

petitioner on bail with stringent conditions.

Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (rupees forty thousand) with one solvent

surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court below in seisin over the matter with the conditions that he shall not commit any

similar office or be involved in such activities, while on bail; shall attend the PS once in a fortnight on Sunday between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m; and shall

report the IO for the purpose of investigation and continue to do so till its conclusion.

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a printout of the order

available in the High Court’s website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned advocate, in the manner prescribed vide

Court’s Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020 as modified by Court’s Notice No.4798, dated 15th April, 2021.

............................................