High CourtsSingle Bench

Santosh Kumar Dash vs State Of Odisha

Orissa High Court · Decided on 12 October 2023 · Citation: (2023) 10 OHC CK 0078

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.K. Sahoo, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 201, 302
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 637 Of 2023
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

13 paragraphs · 431 words

S.K. Sahoo, J

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Tarava P.S. Case No.68 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. Case No.46 of 2020 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Sonepur for offences punishable under sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of Sessions Judge, Sonepur, which was rejected on 21.12.2022.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 05.04.2020 and he has been charge sheeted under sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel further submitted that when the petitioner earlier approached this Court for bail in BLAPL No.8369 of 2020, the same was rejected as per the order dated 23.03.2021 and liberty was granted to renew his prayer for bail after examination of the material witnesses. Learned counsel further submitted that there is no direct evidence so also no clinching circumstantial evidence is available in this case and in the meantime, out of fourteen charge sheeted witnesses, only three witnesses have been examined and they have not stated anything against the petitioner and therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably reconsidered. Learned counsel filed the deposition copies of some witnesses, which are taken on record.

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of accusation against the petitioner, the evidence adduced so far in the learned trial Court, absence of any direct evidence and further taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, I am inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail and direct the petitioner to be released on bail.

Let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000.00 (rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter with further terms and conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper including the conditions that the petitioner shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date to which the case is posted for trial and shall not try to tamper with the prosecution evidence.

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

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

…………………………