Orissa High Court
BLAPL/3175/2018 on 10 July, 2018
Author: S. K. Sahoo
Bench: S. K. Sahoo
BLAPL No.3175 of 2018
05. 10.07.2018 Heard Mr. Devashis Panda, learned counsel for
the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and Mr.
Gourimohan Rath, learned counsel appearing for the
informant.
It seems that the petitioner filed an application
for release on interim bail before the learned 3rd Addl.
Sessions Judge, Cuttack in S.T. Case No.79 of 2017 on the
ground of ailment of his mother on 10.04.2018. The interim
bail application was rejected vide order dated 13.04.2018,
inter alia, on the ground that there is no specific provision
of law relating to interim bail.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that apart from such observation, the learned
trial Court has also taken into account the other aspects
like seriousness of the offences, chance of absconding of
the petitioner and terrorizing and influencing the
prosecution witnesses if liberty is granted to the petitioner.
It is further contended that when an application for interim
bail is filed basing on any ground particularly on the ground
of ailment of any of the family members, the learned trial
Court has to consider such application for interim bail
taking into account the averments taken in the interim bail
application along with the supporting medical documents, if
any. Consideration of the bail application on merit at that
stage is not proper. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that since the rejection order suffers from non-
application of mind, the petitioner may be permitted to
renew his prayer for interim bail before the learned trial
2
Court and he will file a fresh interim bail application with all
medical documents and the same may be considered by the
learned trial Court in accordance with law without being
influenced by the earlier rejection order dated 13.04.2018.
Learned counsel for the State has no serious
objection to such prayer.
Learned counsel for the informant on the other hand
submitted that whether the ground of illness of the mother
which was taken at that stage is correct or not and whether
such situation is still existing or not are also to be taken
into account by the learned trial Court.
Be that as it may, law is very clear that an interim
bail application is always maintainable on the ground of
exigencies and for that no specific provision in the Cr.P.C. is
necessary. When an interim bail application is filed on any
grounds mentioned therein, the learned Court after giving
opportunity of hearing to the other side has to consider
whether the petitioner is entitled to be released on interim
bail on such grounds or not. At the stage of consideration of
the interim bail application, it is better to avoid giving any
observation on the merits inasmuch as the same is likely to
be adversely affect the accused while considering the main
bail application. Therefore, the observation of the learned
trial Court that there is no specific provision of law relating
to the interim bail application should not have been a
ground to reject the interim bail application.
The petitioner is permitted to renew his prayer
for interim bail before the learned trial Court by filing a
3
fresh application which should be supported by the medical
documents, in the event of which after giving due
opportunity of hearing to the other side, the same shall be
considered in accordance with law without being influenced
by the earlier rejection order dated 13.04.2018.
The BLAPL is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted
on proper application.
.......................
S. K. Sahoo, J.
4 5