Orissa High Court
Shiba Sankar Sahoo @ Sonu vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 3 September, 2021
Author: S. K. Panigrahi
Bench: S. K. Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No. 6980 of 2020
Shiba Sankar Sahoo @ Sonu .... Petitioner
Mr. Bisworanjan Swain, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. Karunakar Gaya, Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM:
THE JUSTICE S. K. PANIGRAHI
Order No. ORDER
03.09.2021
05. 1. This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode.
2. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
3. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Sahadevkhunta PS Case No.219 of 2020 corresponding to C.T. Case No.626 of 2020 pending before the court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Balasore, registered for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 342, 328, 376(2)(n), 323 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, has filed this application under Section 439 of CrPC for his release on bail.
4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 17.08.2020, one Madhusmita Mallik ('Complainant') lodged a written report before IIC, Sahadevkhunta PS stating therein that she is a M.Com. 2nd year student of Fakir Mohan College, Balasore and was // 2 // residing at Pramila Mess since 10.02.2019 and has taken admission at Asian Institution for competitive examination. It is alleged herein that the petitioner is the owner of the said institute and the said mess. Therefore, the complainant used to travel with the petitioner owing to the same route. On account of such travel and discussions, intimacy developed between them. In the month of July,2019 the petitioner invited the complainant to meet in a room at Kalinga Institute. After the complainant reached, the petitioner gave her a spiked drink and taking advantage of her wearying condition, the petitioner outraged her modesty and took nude photographs of her. Thereafter, she was blackmailed with leaking her nude photographs in public in case she disclosed the matter in front of everyone. Thereafter on 17.06.2020 the petitioner called the complainant to his office and committed rape on her. Thereafter, the complainant has lodged the written report against the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted. He submits that the petitioner is an innocent person having no nexus with the alleged offences. Further, the allegations levelled against the petitioner are untrue and concocted and the present FIR has been lodged to harass the petitioner. On bare perusal of the FIR and other connected materials, it is clear that there is absolutely no prima facie case can be made out against the present petitioner. Moreover, Page 2 of 3 // 3 // the complainant is a major and well-educated woman and she was in a consensual relationship with the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner is in no way involved in the commission of the alleged offences and is entitled to bail.
6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the petitioner on the grounds that there is clinching evidence against the petitioner.
7. Considering the nature and gravity of the accusation, character of evidence appearing against the petitioner, the stringent punishment provided and that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence alleged or not likely to commit any such offence, which is not possible to record in this case, the prayer for bail is devoid of merit. Hence, the prayer for bail stands rejected.
8. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of being dismissed.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner is given liberty to approach this Court after framing of charge.
10.Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
(S. K. Panigrahi) Judge Gs Page 3 of 3