Kanhu @ Santosh Kumar Rout vs State Of Odisha

Savitri Ratho, J

Heard Mr. S. Bahadur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State.

This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner in connection with Rajkanika P.S. Case No.421 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 957 of 2023 pending in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Aul, where charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner for commission of offences under Sections 376(2)(n)/506/451 of IPC.

The petitioner had moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kendrapara which was rejected on 18.08.2023.

The prosecution allegation in brief is that the petitioner is the neighbour of the informant and the informant was staying with her mother and sister in the said house and in absence of the mother and sister the petitioner had entered her house and committed rape on her threatening her not to disclose the incident to anybody. She kept quiet out of fear and taking advantage of the same, the petitioner came to the house and kept sexual relationship with her on different occasions. Finding no way out, the victim disclosed the matter before the mother who sent her to her uncle’s house situated at village Bangarkuan. On 17/18.07.2023 the petitioner along with eight to ten persons came to her uncle’s house and abused her and her uncle in obscene language and threatened to kill them and the FIR was registered i.e. on 18.07.2023.

Mr. S. Bahadur, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 20.07.2023 and in the meanwhile the investigation has been completed and perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. would reveal that the victim was aged about 20 years at the time of occurrence and the relationship between them was consensual. But she subsequently avoided the petitioner. Copy of the charge sheet along with the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and the statements of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner are taken on record.

Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating that the petitioner has taken advantage of the victim’s helplessness and committed sexual intercourse with her against her will giving her threats and if he is released on bail, he is likely to tamper with the evidence and threaten her.

Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioner, the contents of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and as the investigation has been completed, I am inclined to allow the prayer for bail.

Let the petitioner- Kanhu @ Santosh Kumar Rout be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the learned Court below in seisin over the matter, including the following conditions:

(i) He shall not go near the house of the victim girl or the house of her uncle or try to contact her.

(ii) He will not try to influence or threaten the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) He will report before the Rajkanika Police Station every Sunday between 10.00 A.M. to 7.00 P.M. till conclusion of trial.

(iv) He shall remain present in Court on each date it is fixed for trial.

Violation of any condition will entail in cancellation of bail.

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

……………………………