CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Santosh Kumar Khora @ Mania vs State Of Odisha

Orissa High Court · Decided on 23 August 2023 · Citation: (2023) 08 OHC CK 0153

HON’BLE JUDGES
V. Narasingh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 302
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 173 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

14 paragraphs · 368 words

V. Narasingh, J

1.

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

2.

The petitioner is an accused in connection with C.T. Case No. 78 of 2022, pending before the Court of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nabarangpur, arising out of Nabarangpur P.S. Case No. 386 of 2022 for alleged commission of offences under Sections 302/34 of IPC.

3.

Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Additional Dist. & Sessions Judge, Nbarangpur, by order dated 19.12.2022 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

4.

It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner is in custody since 01.08.2022 and the trial has already commenced. Taking into account the nature of allegation, his further continuance in custody is unwarranted.

5.

It is case of the prosecution that the Petitioner has been named in the dying declaration of the deceased.

6.

Per contra learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that there are two dying declarations in the case at hand and in one of the dying declaration, one Chitrasen Bisoi is a witness who has resiled during the course of examination.

7.

Hence it is submitted that no credence can be attached to the dying declaration which has been recorded by the Assistant Surgeon C.W. 20.

8.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

9.

On consideration of the materials on record, it would not be prudent on the part of this Court to make any observation regarding veracity of the dying declaration and regarding the deposition of P.W.1, since learned Trial Court is in seisin of the matter.

10.

Considering the statement of C.W. 20 coupled with the statement of the witnesses C.W. 2,5 and 13, this Court is NOT INCLINED to entertain this bail application at this stage.

11.

It is open to the Petitioner to renew his prayer after examination of material witnesses including (Debabrata Dakua) cited as C.W. 20.

12.

It is needless to state here, if such application is moved the same shall be considered on its own merit without being influenced by the earlier rejection or the order passed by this Court..

………………………………