High CourtsSingle Bench

Minja Nayak vs State Of Odisha

Orissa High Court · Decided on 30 May 2024 · Citation: (2024) 05 OHC CK 0218

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.K. Mohapatra, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 399, 402
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 1986 Of 2024
Ask AI about this case

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

14 paragraphs · 562 words

A.K. Mohapatra, J

1.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

2.

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.

3.

The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection with C.T. Case No.1240 of 2023, arising out of Chandrasekharpur P.S. Case No.504 of 2023, pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C.-II, Bhubaneswar for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 399, 402 of IPC.

4.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is in custody since 18.10.2023. He contended that in the meantime the investigation has been concluded and the final charge sheet has been filed. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the Petitioner is having five criminal antecedents. It was also contended that the Petitioner belongs to the locality and there is no chance of absconding from justice. In such view of the matter learned counsel for the Petitioner contended the Petitioner be released on bail on such terms and conditions as this Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

5.

Learned Additional Standing Counsel on the other hand opposed the bail application of the Petitioner on the ground that the allegations made in the F.I.R. are very serious in nature. Further, considering the antecedents of the Petitioner, in the event this Court is released the Petitioner on bail, there is an every possibility that the Petitioner may indulge the similar criminal activities. Therefore, on such ground, learned counsel for the State submitted that the bail application of the Petitioner be rejected at this juncture.

6.

Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on careful consideration of the surrounding facts as well as materials on record, further keeping in view the seriousness and gravity of the allegation, this Court is inclined to release both the Petitioner on bail subject to imposition of stringent conditions.

7.

Hence, it is directed that both the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter subject to the following terms and conditions:

I) the Petitioner shall appear before the concerned Police Station once in a fortnight preferably on ‘Sunday’ in between 10.00 A.M. to 1.00 P.M. for a period of three months, thereafter, once in a month till conclusion of the trial.

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

8.

It is open for the Court in seisin over the matter to impose any other conditions as may be deemed just and proper.

9.

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner is subject to depositing a cash security of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousands) 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.

10.

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

……………………………..