Chandrakanta Baskey @ Kanka vs State Of Orissa

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.

None appears for the informant.

This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Raibania P.S. Case No.59 of 2017 corresponding to Special Case No.363 of 2017 pending in the Court of learned Ad-hoc Addl. Sessions Judge (F.T.S.C.), Balasore for the offences punishable under sections 376(2)(i)(f)(l) of the Indian Penal Code read with section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Ad-hoc Addl. Sessions Judge (F.T.S.C.), Balasore, which was rejected on 20.12.2022.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 15.09.2017 and he has been charge sheeted under section 376(2)(i)(f)(l) of the Indian Penal Code read with section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and when the petitioner approached this Court last time for bail in BLAPL No.520 of 2019 while rejecting the bail application vide order dated 18.02.2019, the petitioner was directed to renew his prayer for bail after examination of the victim as well as other vital witnesses in the learned trial Court and the learned trial Court was directed to take steps for examination of the victim and other vital witnesses at the first instance. Learned counsel further submitted that till date, the victim could not be examined as her whereabouts is not known and this Court on 13.04.2023, directed the Inspector in-charge of Raibania police station to appear before the learned trial Court and receive summons in respect of the victim and ensure her attendance but the same has not been complied with.

Learned counsel for the State submitted that he has received instruction that the victim is working in a brick kiln in the State of Andhra Pradesh.

Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out from the rejection order dated 20.12.2022 that out of thirty charge sheeted witnesses, five witnesses have been examined and subsequently two more witnesses have already been examined.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, slow progress of the trial and since in spite of repeated opportunity given by the learned trial Court to the prosecution to examine the victim, the same has not been done and the prosecution is not sure the whereabouts of the victim, I am inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail and direct the petitioner to be released 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 he shall not indulge in any criminal activities and shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date to which the case would be posted for trial and shall not try to tamper with the prosecution case and shall not try to come in contact with the victim or her family members.

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

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

……………………………