Chiku @ Sudhansu Rout Vs State Of Odisha

V. Narasingh, J

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

The Petitioner is an accused in connection with S.T. Case No.246 of 2022 pending on the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-OPID, Cuttack, arising out of Purighat P.S. No.94 of 2022 for commission of offence alleged under Sections 498(A)/307/302 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. SJ-cum-PO, DC, OPID Act, Cuttack by order dated 30.10.2023 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

This is the second journey of the Petitioners to this Court. Earlier bail application i.e. BLAPL No.11015 of 2022 filed by the Petitioner was disposed of by order dated 10.01.2023 giving him liberty to renew his prayer before the learned Court in seisin after examination of the charge sheeted witnesses Nos.1 and 3.

It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner is in custody since 26.04.2022 and as trial is lingering, the Petitioner may be released on bail.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner relying on the statements of P.Ws.1 and 3 submits that further incarceration of the Petitioner is not justified.

The deceased in the case at hand is the mother of P.W.1 and is the mother-in-law of the accused-Petitioner.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that apart from other statements, there is statement of one Trilochan Basti, the son of the deceased, a material witness, yet to be examined.

It is submitted that since charge sheeted witness P.W.1, the wife of the present Petitioner and the daughter of the deceased, has not supported the prosecution and referring to the statement of P.W.3-the house owner, Petitioner seeks release.

This Court perused the statements of P.W.1 as well as P.W.3.

Since the learned Court is in seisin over the matter, it would not be prudent on the part of this Court to make any observations regarding the evidentiary value of the statement of P.W.3.

12.A. Taking note of the same and the discrepancies to which the learned counsel for the Petitioner is adverting to evidently cannot be gone into at this stage qua the statement of P.W.1 which according to the learned counsel for the Petitioner is an exaggeration at the time of examination in Court.

In view of the materials on record, this Court is not inclined to entertain this bail application at this stage.

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

Learned Court in seisin is requested to expedite the trial.

Liberty is granted to the Petitioner to renew his prayer at a later.

...……………………………