Chaitanya Murmu Vs State Of Odisha

Savitri Ratho, J

Heard Mr. B.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.

This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner in connection with Morada P.S. Case No. 93 of 2023 corresponding to C.T. Case No. 27 of 2023 in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Morada which is now pending before the learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Baripada in S.T. Case No. 144 of 2023, where the petitioner facing trial for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 376(2)(n) of IPC.

The prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 22.11.2023 by the learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Baripada.

The prosecution allegation in brief is that the petitioner and the victim developed acquaintance over telephone when the victim was studying in +2. They kept talking to each other. When she was studying in the +3 second year, the petitioner on the plea of taking to her to his house, took her to his maternal uncle’s house and had sexual relations with her against her wishes. Thereafter, on the plea of taking her to his house, he has taken her to the jungle and again had physical relations with her against her wishes. Telling her that he was unmarried and would marry her, he had physical relations with her on a number of occasions. Ultimately, he refused to marry the victim stating that he was already married and has children. The victim informed her brother and other family members and they confronted the petitioner who stated that as he was married, he could not marry the victim, FIR has been registered thereafter.

Mr. B.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 16.03.2023. He further submits that the victim is a major girl and she and the petitioner were in a consensual relationship, but since they were discovered by her brother, she has made false allegations against him regarding use of force. He further submits that although the case has been committed in the month of May, 2023 and charge has been framed on 13.07.2023, till date no witness has been examined.

Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating that the petitioner has spoiled the life of the victim by having sexual relationship with her giving her the impression that he was unmarried and ultimately has refused to marry her. He further submits that if the petitioner is released on bail, the chances of him, tampering with the evidence and threatening and influencing the victim girl cannot be ruled out.

Perused the report of the learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Baripada who has stated that though charge has been framed in July 2023, no witness has yet been examined.

Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioner, the age of the victim and the period spent by the petitioner in jail custody and delay in commencement of trial, I am inclined to allow the prayer for bail, subject to stringent conditions.

The petitioner- Chaitanya Murmu shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the learned Court below in seisin over the matter, including the following conditions:

(i) He shall not go near the house of the victim girl or try to contact her.

(ii) He will not try to influence or threaten the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) He will report before the Morada Police Station once in a month preferably on a Sunday between 9.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m. till completion of trial.

(iv) He shall remain present in Court on each date it is fixed for trial.

Violation of any condition will entail in cancellation of bail.

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

A copy of this order be supplied to Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for onward transmission to the I.I.C., Morada Police Station.

……………………………