Lima Digal vs State Of Odisha

G. Satapathy, J

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

This is a bail application U/S.439 of Cr.P.C. by the Petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Balliguda P.S. Case No. 230 of 2022 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 45 of 2023 pending in the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Balliguda for commission of offence punishable Under Sections 302 and 120-B of IPC and U/S. 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, on the allegation of providing information about the deceased to Naxalites who killed the deceased Nilakantha Mallick.

In the course of hearing of the bail application, Mr. M. Das, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that although FIR has been lodged against unknown persons for commission of murder of the deceased Nilakantha Mallick, but the present Petitioner has been implicated in this case only after recording of statement of one Ananda Kanhar whose statement was recorded after one month four days of the occurrence and, thereby, the Petitioner having falsely implicated in this case, Section-43-D(5) of UAP Act would not be attracted against the Petitioner for refusing bail to him. It is further submitted by him that the Petitioner has been detained in custody since 06.11.2022 and in meanwhile, charge sheet has been submitted without any report of criminal antecedent against the Petitioner and the Petitioner, therefore, may kindly be granted bail.

On the other hand, Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned AGA, by placing the statement of Anand Kanhar submits that there is a prima facie case against the Petitioner and Section 43-D(5) of the UAP Act would operate as a bar for grant of bail to the present Petitioner.

After having considered the rival submissions made and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of accusations raised against the Petitioner and keeping in view the nature and strength of the supporting materials available on record and regard being had to the implication of the present Petitioner after one month four days of the occurrence which in fact was done after recording of the statement of Anand Kanhar and thereby, the stipulation as contained in Section 43-D(5) of UAP Act being diluted and taking into account the other circumstances on record in entirety including the pre trail detention of the Petitioner since 06.11.2022 with submission of charge-sheet and there being no criminal antecedent reported against the Petitioner and further taking into account the sole allegation against the Petitioner for providing information about the deceased to the Naxalite, this Court admits him to bail.

Hence, the bail application of the Petitioner stands allowed and the Petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it with following conditions:-

(i) the Petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail,

(ii) the Petitioner shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless his attendance is dispensed with,

(iii) the Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case

(iv) the Petitioner shall report attendance before the jurisdiction Police Station once in a week preferably on Sunday in between 10 A.M. to 12 Noon for three (03) months from the actual date of his release from the custody.

The I.I.C. of Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the Petitioner unnecessarily after recording his attendance beyond the time as stipulated.

It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the Petitioner in future for grave and serious offences on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case.

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.

………………………………….