Srikanta Padhi vs State Of Orissa

A.K. Mohapatra, J

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

Heard learned Senior counsel appearing for the Petitioners and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Party. Perused the materials placed before this Court.

The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioners for regular bail in connection with C.T. Case No.674 of 2024, arising out of Brahmabarada P.S. Case No.56 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Chandikhol for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 364(A),341,323,506, 507 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

Learned Senior counsel for the Petitioners submits that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is submitted by the learned Senior counsel for the Petitioners that the Petitioners are in custody since 16.03.2024. He further contended that in the meantime the investigation has been progressed substantially and the custodial interrogation of the Petitioners could not be required for the purpose of investigation. By referring to the F.I.R. allegation, learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the Petitioner No.1 had paid a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four lakhs) to the account of Sankat Mochan Repo Agencies which was a shop for selling old truck and running by husband of Informant. However, the husband of the Informant could not supply the truck. When the Petitioner No.1 demanded back to the said money, the present case has been falsely implicated in against the present petitioners indicating the Petitioners as an accused. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that Petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents. Further contended that the Petitioners are belong to locality and there is no chance of absconding. In such view of the matter learned counsel for the Petitioners contended the Petitioners be released on bail on such terms and conditions as this Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Learned Additional Standing Counsel on the other hand opposed the bail application of the Petitioners on the ground that the allegations made in the F.I.R. are very serious in nature. Further, contended that the investigation is still on and in the event the Petitioners are released on bail there is cause delay in submission of charge sheet. Therefore, on such ground, the bail application of Petitioners be rejected at this juncture.

Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on careful consideration of the surrounding facts as well as materials on record, further taking into consideration the custodial detention of the Petitioners as well as the Petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioners on bail subject to imposition of stringent conditions.

Hence, it is directed that the Petitioners be released on bail in the aforesaid case each of them on furnishing bail bond of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter.

It is open for the Court in seisin over the matter to impose any other conditions as may be deemed just and proper.

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioners be subject to the condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the Petitioners. In the event it is found that the Petitioners are having any similar criminal antecedents, this bail order shall automatically stand revoked.

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

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

.…………………………….