Biswajit Sahoo vs State Of Odisha

S.K. Sahoo, J

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

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

This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Athagarh P.S. Case No.42 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. Case No.36 of 2020 pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Athagarh for offences punishable under sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Athagarh, which was rejected on 05.05.2021.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 08.02.2020 and he has been charge sheeted under sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel further submitted that earlier two bail applications of the petitioner have been rejected by this Court and at present out of thirty-seven charge sheeted witnesses, eighteen witnesses have been examined and there is no direct evidence and the case is based on circumstantial evidence. Learned counsel further submitted that it is the prosecution case that at the instance of the petitioner and on the basis of his statement recorded under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, the dead body of the deceased so also the weapon of offences i.e. iron rod and spade were recovered. Learned counsel further submitted that in view of the delayed disposal of the trial, the nature of evidence adduced so far in the learned trial Court, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered.

Learned counsel for the state has produced the case diary and on verification of the same, he fairly submitted that the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel further placed the evidence of P.W.-16 Jajati Keshari Kantha, who is a witness leading to the recovery of the dead body as well as the weapon of offences. Learned counsel further submitted that some important witnesses are yet to be examined in the trial Court and there is every possibility of tampering with the evidence in case, the petitioner is enlarged on bail.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, nature of evidence adduced by the prosecution, the fact that the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and the case is based on circumstantial evidence and taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

Let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000.00 (rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter with further terms and conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper including the conditions that the petitioner shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date to which the case is posted for trial and shall not try to tamper with the prosecution evidence.

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

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

……………………………