High CourtsSingle Bench

Vijay vs State Of Odisha

Orissa High Court · Decided on 6 June 2023 · Citation: (2023) 06 OHC CK 0013

HON’BLE JUDGES
V. Narasingh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 420 · Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 66D
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 5847 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 · 342 words

V. Narasingh, J

1.

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

2.

The Petitioner is an accused in G.R Case No.778 of 2023 pending on the file of learned J.M.F.C. (R), Berhampur arising out of Gopalpur P.S. Case No.150 of 2023 for commission of the alleged offence under Section 420 IPC and Section 66D of the I.T Act.

3.

Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s. 439 Cr.P.C by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Berhampur by order dated 20.05.2023 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

4.

It is submitted by the learned counsel that since the Petitioner is in custody since 8.5.2023, he may be released on bail.

5.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail during currency of investigation.

6.

Taking into account that the Petitioner is aged about 24 years and is in custody since 8.5.2023, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin.

7.

Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once every 15 days on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin till submission of final form. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin.

8.

To allay the legitimate apprehension of the learned Public Prosecutor regarding ensuring the presence of the Petitioner during trial since he does not belong to the State of Odisha, additionally it is directed that one of the family members of the Petitioner shall execute the P.R bond in addition to the sureties in terms of the order of the learned Court in seisin and his criminal antecedent from P.S. Uchana, Dist- Haryana, shall also be called for.

9.

If it comes to fore that the Petitioner has any criminal antecedent, this order shall stand recalled.

10.

The BLAPL thus stands disposed of.

11.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.

………………………………