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
15 paragraphs · 381 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.186 of 2023 and S.T. Case No.128 of 2023, pending before the Court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Purusottampur, Ganjam, arising out of Purushottampur P.S. Case No.0192 of 2023, for alleged commission of offences under Sections-341/323/326/307/294/506/34 of IPC r/w Sec-25(1-B)(a)(b) and 27(1) Arms Act.
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. Sessions Judge, Chatrapur by order dated 13.10.2023 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.
It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner is in custody since 29.03.2023 and as the charge sheet has already been filed in the meanwhile, he may be released on bail.
It is apt to note here that this is the second journey of the Petitioner to this Court. Earlier the Petitioner approached this Court in BLAPL No.7843 of 2023 which was rejected by order dated 31.08.2023, inter alia, on the ground that the same was during the currency of investigation and leave was granted to the Petitioner to renew his prayer post charge sheet.
For reasons best known the filing of earlier bail application was not indicated in the certificate filed in the case at hand.
It is stated by the learned counsel that inadvertently filing of earlier bail application was not mentioned.
Learned counsel for the Petitioner files a memo to the said effect. The same is taken on record.
This Court perused the 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the injured Niranjam Moharana.
Considering the role ascribed to the Petitioner and the overt act is primarily attributed to one Sanatan Pradhan and the Petitioner being the first offender, as stated, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned court in seisin.
Accordingly, the bail application stands disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted in course of the day.
.……………………………….