Manoj Lenka@muna vs State Of Odisha

A.K. Mohapatra, J

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party. Perused the materials placed before this Court.

The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail relating to Harabhanga P.S. Case No.44 of 2024, corresponding to C.T. Case No.100 of 2024, pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Harabhanga, for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 392 & 34 of IPC.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is in custody since 03.05.2024. He further submitted that the investigation has progressed substantially and the final charge-sheet is likely to be filed soon. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that as per the allegation made in the FIR, the Petitioner and two other persons snatched away the informant’s mobile phone, ATM Card and cash of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand), and later the accused persons withdrew a cash of Rs.1,45,062/- from the account of the informant by misusing the said ATM Card. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the Petitioner does not have any criminal antecedent. It was also contended that since the Petitioner belongs to locality, there is no chance of absconding. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on any terms and condition which the Petitioner undertakes to abide by while on bail.

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that the allegations made in the FIR are serious in nature. Learned counsel for the State opposed the release of the Petitioner in view of the nature and seriousness of allegation made against the Petitioner. Therefore, he submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected at this juncture.

Considering the submissions of the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on careful examination of the materials on record, and the period of custodial detention, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter.

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner is subject to depositing each of a cash security of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) before the learned Court in seisin over the matter, which shall be kept in any Nationalized Bank in interest bearing account initially for a period of one year which will be renewable from time to time till conclusion of trial and the same shall be abide by the final outcome of the trial of the case. In addition to that the Petitioner shall also furnish a property security to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand).

Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner is subject to the condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the Petitioner. In the event it is found that the Petitioner is having any similar criminal antecedent, this order shall automatically stand revoked.

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

……………………..