AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
16 paragraphs · 445 wordsS.K. Sahoo, J
I.A. 891 OF 2023
This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not want to press this interim application.
Accordingly, the I.A. stands disposed of as not pressed.
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 S.T. Case No.121 of 2020 (S.T. Case No.86 of 2019) arising out of Kodala P.S. Case No.269 of 2018 pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kodala, Ganjam for offences punishable under sections 147/148/302/ 120-B/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 25(1-B)(a)/27 of the Arms Act.
The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kodala, which was rejected on 12.05.2023.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 16.12.2018 and when he approached this Court first time in BLAPL No.7617 of 2019, the same was rejected as per order dated 07.03.2022 and subsequently, he filed another bail application vide BLAPL No.9325 of 2022, which was disposed of as not pressed. It is further submitted that even though Sessions Trial in the year 2020 but only three witnesses, who are the eye witnesses to the occurrence as per the charge sheet, have been examined and none of them have supported the prosecution case and therefore, in view of the inordinate delay in disposal of the trial, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably reconsidered.
Learned counsel for the State on verification of the case record submitted that there are other eye witnesses to the occurrence, who have not been examined.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of evidence adduced so far in the trial Court, the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody and slow progress of the trial, 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 subject to condition that the petitioner shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date when the case would be posted for trial.
Violation of any terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.
The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
…………………………
