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
17 paragraphs · 576 wordsSavitri Ratho, J
Mr. Susil Kumar Pattnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defects pointed out by S.R. in Court.
This application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed in connection with Barbil P.S. Case No. 244 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 741 of 2023 pending in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Barbil registered under Sections 399/402 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act.
The prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 29.09.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Champua in B.A. No. 299 of 2023 while investigation was in progress.
The prosecution allegations in brief against the petitioner are that on 06.09.2023, the Sub Inspector of Barbil Police Station lodged F.I.R. stating that on the same day at about 11.30 P.M. while they were performing patrolling duty, on getting reliable information at about 12.15 A.M. that some persons were conspiring at Damu Hutting Field and preparing to commit dacoity, they reached the spot and found one white colour Nexa Car bearing Registration No. JH-05-CZ-0020 with some persons sitting inside. The present petitioners were apprehended from the car and one country made pistol was seized from the possession of the co-accused Rakesh Choudhury, two bhujali from the co-accused Sandeep Singh and co-accused Biltu Kumar Singh, one packet of chilly powder and a knife from the present petitioner Ravi Kumar Ram apart from mobile phones, some beer bottles and one paper containing map of the locality.
Mr. Susil Kumar Pattnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 07.09.2023 and has no criminal antecedents. He further submits that in the meantime investigation has been completed and since the petitioner is a local man being a resident of Barbil, there is no chance of his absconding if he is released on bail.
Ms. S. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel opposes the prayer for bail stating that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent which is a case i.e. Barbil P.S. Case No. 76 of 2007 offence under Sections 341/323/294 of IPC. She further submits that in view of the nature of allegations against the petitioner, he may indulge in further criminal activity if he is released on bail.
Considering the submissions of the learned counsel, the nature of allegations against the petitioner, as the single antecedent against the petitioner is of the year, 2007 and involves offences triable by learned Magistrate, I am inclined to allow the prayer for bail.
The petitioner-Rabi Kumar Ram @ Ravi shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the learned Court below in seisin over the matter, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents, including the following conditions:
(i) He will not indulge in any criminal activity while on bail.
(ii) He will not threaten or try to influence prosecution witnesses while on bail.
(iii) He will report before the IIC, Barbil Police Station, once every alternate Sunday between 10.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon, till conclusion of trial.
Violation of any condition will entail in cancellation of bail/ recall of this order.
The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
Copy of this order be supplied to Ms. S. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel for onward transmission to the IIC, Barbil Police Station.
………………………………
