Okila @ Anil Samal Vs State Of Odisha

B. P. Routray, J

This order arises out of an application filed under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail and the offences alleged are under Sections 302/506/120-B/34 I.P.C.

Heard Mr. Das, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. K. Das, learned A.S.C. for the State-Opposite Party.

Mr.Das, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is inside custody since 12th September, 2020 and in the meantime 14 witnesses have been examined and the trial is yet to complete. It is further submitted that most of the witnesses did not support the prosecution case.

Upon hearing Mr.Das, learned ASC for the State and upon perusal of the evidences of the witnesses viz., P.W.1 to 9 as filed under Annexure-3, it is seen that though some of the eye witnesses have turned hostile but P.W.1, who is the wife of the deceased and the informant, has stated about the occurrence clearly. According to the statement of P.W.1 this Petitioner is the main assailant who dealt tangia blow on the head of the deceased.

Upon going through the evidences of such witnesses and keeping in view the background fact that the dispute is relating to sale of liquor in the village which was opposed by the deceased, I am not inclined to release the Petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.

However, learned Trial Court is directed to complete the trial by examining the remaining witnesses as expeditiously as possible preferably by end of May, 2024. A copy of this order be communicated to the Trial Court without delay.

The BLAPL is dismissed

It goes without saying that, it is open for the Petitioner to move for bail in case the trial is not completed within the stipulated period.

An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

……………………………