Panchanana Karjee vs State Of Odisha

S.S. Mishra, J

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Ramagiri P.S. Case No.42 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.49 of 2023 for the offences under Sections 376/506 of the IPC pending in the Court of learned Assistant Sessions Judge, R. Udayagiri.

The  allegation  as  per  the  F.I.R.  is  that  on 26. 09.2023 at about 8.00 A.M., the present petitioner, who happens to be the husband of the one Anganwadi Helper, came to the Angawadi Centre of village Kamaladiha and told the victim, who is the Anganwadi Worker that he will cook for the Anganwadi Kendra in place of his wife. By saying this, he had forcibly entered into the Anganwadi Kendra and caught hold of the mouth of the victim and committed rape on her. He also threatened her not to disclose the matter to anybody or he will again commit rape on her in future. Thereafter, the victim told the matter to her husband and with the help of the villagers, they convened a meeting. But in the said meeting, the accused did not agree for which the victim informant was compelled to intimate the matter before the Ramgiri Police Station and the F.I.R. was registered.

In this case, investigation has already been completed and charge sheet has also laid down on 18.11.2023. The statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. She inter alia stated that the petitioner has committed forcibly sexual intercourse with her and she has struggled to escape from the clutches of the. The F.I.R. was lodged two days after the alleged incident.

Mr. Rout, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that the allegation made in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was serious in nature. Therefore, no leniency should be shown to the petitioner.

Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon the medical examination report dated 29.09.2023 submits that if the allegation made in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. cannot be believed. From the medical examination report, it appears that there is no bodily injuries on the person of the victim suggesting sexual intercourse and on examination of genitals, there is no sign and symptom of recent sexual intercourse.

The petitioner had approached the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, R. Udayagiri praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 11.12.2023 has rejected the bail application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. praying for enlargement on bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the plea of bail of the petitioner is not pending before any other Court except the present one.

Taking into consideration the period of custody from 28.09.2023, medical examination report which indicates that there was no sexual intercourse taken place and the fact that there is no bodily injuries received by the victim, I am of the considered view that the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail more particularly, in this case, charge sheet has already been filed, I am inclined to admit the petitioner on bail.

Hence, the petitioner be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it would deem just and proper subject to further conditions which are as follows:

(i) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner whatsoever.

(ii) The  petitioner  shall  not  contact  with  the victim and

(iii) The petitioner shall not influence the prosecution witnesses in any manner whatsoever

(iv) The  shall  not  enter  into  the  Anganwadi Kendra.

Violation of the bail conditions shall entail consideration for cancellation of the bail granted to the petitioner.

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

………………………….