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
17 paragraphs · 423 wordsV. Narasingh, J
Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner is an accused in connection with G.R. Case No.156 of 2022, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kantabanji, arising out of Turekela P.S. Case No.68 of 2022, for commission of the alleged offence under Sections 302/201/34 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 Additional Sessions Judge, Kantabanji, by order dated 06.11.2023 in the aforementioned cases, the present BLAPL has been filed.
It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner is in custody since 14.07.2023 and in the meanwhile trial has progressed and 24 out of 29 witnesses have been examined.
Learned counsel for the Petitioner has placed on record the statement of the witnesses.
On perusal of the same, it is seen that the witnesses have resiled.
Referring to the same and that the Petitioner is the first offender, learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks release.
It is the further submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that taking into account the age of the Petitioner (65 years), his bail application may be liberally considered.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that during the currency of trial it is the settled principle of law that scrutiny of materials on record is not permissible.
Taking into account the nature of allegation qua the Petitioner, the evidence as adduced, the age of the Petitioner and he being the first offender, this Court directs his release on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned court in seisin.
Before releasing, learned Court in seisin is requested to verify the criminal antecedent of the Petitioner. If it comes to the fore that the Petitioner has any criminal antecedent, this order shall not be given effect to.
Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once every month on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin till conclusion of trial. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin.
Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per the rules.
..………………………….