Subrat Sahu vs State Of Odisha & Another

S.K. Sahoo, J

This matter is taken up through video conferencing Mode.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant.

This is an application for bail under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Bantala P.S. Case No. 215 of 2020 corresponding to Special

(POCSO) No. 54 of 2020 pending in the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judge -cum- Special Court under POCSO Act, Angul for alleged commission

of offences under sections 506 and 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code and section 4(2) of POCSO Act.

The prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge -cum- Special Court under POCSO Act, Angul vide order

dated 02.11.2020.

On 20.07.2021 the Investigating Officer of the case was asked to appear through virtual mode with the 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim. Ms.

Sumitra Patra, the Inspector in-charge of Bantala Police Station is present. It is stated that the Investigating Officer of the case has already been

transferred to some other police station.

Learned counsel for the State has produced the 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 12.09.2020 and he has been charge sheeted under

sections 506 and 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code and section 4(2) of POCSO Act. Learned counsel further submitted that prior to the lodging of the

F.I.R. in this case i.e. on 11.09.2020 by the victim herself, the mother of the petitioner has lodged an F.I.R. against the father of the victim and in that

case, charge sheet has been submitted. It is further submitted that the case has been foisted to harass the petitioner and in view of the available

materials on record, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered.

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, produced the case diary and submitted that the date of birth of the victim is 09.10.2007 and as on

the date of occurrence, she was twelve years. He placed the 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim, from which it appears that the petitioner committed

sexual offences with the victim on three occasions.

Learned counsel appearing for the informant also opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature and gravity of accusation, the age of the victim and the

manner in which the crime has been committed, while not inclining to release the petitioner on bail, I direct the learned trial Court to expedite the trial

and at the first instance take steps for examination of the victim and for ensuring the attendance of the victim, the learned trial Court shall take the

assistance of the Inspector in-charge of Bantala Police Station.

The petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after examination of the victim in the trial Court.

Copy of the order be communicated to the learned trial Court for compliance.

The personal appearance of the Inspector in-charge of Bantala Police Station is dispensed with.

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a printout of the order

available in the High Court’s website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned advocate, in the manner prescribed vide

Court’s Notice No. 4587 dated 25th March 2020 as modified by Court’s Notice No. 4798 dated 15th April 2021.

……………………………