Dilli Sahu vs State Of Odisha

S.K. Sahoo, J

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

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned 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 Dharkote P.S. Case No.157 of 2019 corresponding to S.T. Case No.91 of 2022 pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska for alleged commission of offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska which was rejected on 28.02.2023.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 28.05.2022 and he has been charge sheeted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel further submitted that the occurrence in question stated to have taken place on 23.10.2019 and though it is the prosecution case that one Susanta Jena is an eye witness to the occurrence but during the trial of the co-accused persons, the said Susanta Jena was examined as P.W.2 and he did not support the prosecution case and though it is the further prosecution case that the deceased made oral dying declaration before the doctor, namely, Dr. Bighneswar Panigrahi of C.H.C. Sheragada but in the trial of the co-accused persons, the said doctor being examined as P.W.1 stated that the deceased came with multiple injuries on his body and his condition was very serious and after giving him first aid treatment, he was referred to M.K.C.G. Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur for further treatment and the doctor also specifically stated that he has not ascertained from the injured about the detailed history of the injury on his body and he has not recorded the dying declaration of the injured. Learned counsel further submitted that one Tukuna Pradhan is another material witness of the prosecution but the said witness being examined in the trial Court as P.W.5 in

the trial of co-accused persons has not supported the prosecution case and was declared hostile and taking into account these features, the co-accused Ganga Sahoo was directed to be released on bail by this Court in BLAPL No.3171 of 2021 as per order dated 24.09.2021. He further submitted that other co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail and therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered.

Learned counsel for the State has produced the case diary and opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties, nature of accusation against the petitioner, the fact that the eye witness to the occurrence being examined in the trial Court in the trial of the co-accused persons has not supported the prosecution case and the doctor before whom the oral dying declaration was stated to have been made has also stated nothing in that respect in the trial of the co-accused persons and release of co-accused on bail and further 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/-(rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the

learned Court in seisin over the matter with further conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper including the conditions that the petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses, 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.

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

BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

…………………………