Madan Adjuad vs State Of Odisha & Another .... Opposite ... on 1 September, 2023

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Madan Adjuad vs State Of Odisha & Another .... Opposite ... on 1 September, 2023

Bench: V. Narasingh

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                  BLAPL No.4175 of 2023

             Madan Adjuad                      ....                  Petitioner
                                                      Mr. D. Panda, Advocate
                                         -versus-

             State of Odisha & another         ....           Opposite Parties
                                                      Mr. P.K. Maharaj, ASC

                             CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
                                          ORDER

01.09.2023 Order No.

02. 1. Mr. Ranjan Barik, learned counsel who has entered appearance on behalf of the victim, undertakes to file vakalatanama in the case at hand.

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant.

3. The Petitioner is an accused in Special G.R. Case No.06 of 2021 pending on the file of learned Special Judge (POCSO), Balangir, arising out of Titlagarh P.S. Case No.25 of 2021 for commission of offence alleged under Sections 376(1)(2)(3)/506 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

4. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned ADJ-cum-Special Judge under POCSO Act, Balangir by order dated 28.02.2023 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel that out of 33 witnesses 24 witnesses including the victim have been examined Page 1 of 2 and relying on the statement of the victim at Annexure-3 submits that further continuance of the Petitioner in custody is not warranted.

6. It is further submitted that there are materials on record which ex facie falsifies the accusation under the POCSO Act.

7. Learned counsel for the Informant who has appeared through V.C opposes the prayer for bail of the Petitioner.

8. Learned counsel for the State submits that in view of the statement of the victim, no leniency ought to be shown to the Petitioner. Hence, the Petitioner should not be released on bail.

9. So far as the submission relating to POSCO Act is concerned it is stated by the learned counsel for the State that there are materials on record against the Petitioner.

10. This Court finds force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the State.

11. On perusal of the statement of the victim, this Court is not inclined to entertain this bail application.

12. Accordingly, BLAPL stands rejected.

13. Since the Petitioner is stated to be in custody since 18.01.2021, learned Court in seisin is called upon to conclude the trial, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order.

14. Leave is granted to the Petitioner to renew his prayer in the event trial is not concluded within the time frame.

15. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed

Signed by: PRADEEP KUMAR SWAIN Reason: Authentication (V. NARASINGH) Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Judge Date: 02-Sep-2023 15:32:04 PKS Page 2 of 2

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Orissa High Court