Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 12, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Tuna @ Rana Pratap vs State Of Odisha ... Opp.Party on 4 November, 2020

Author: S.K. Sahoo

Bench: S.K. Sahoo

                            BLAPL No. 1310 of 2020




                   TUNA @ RANA PRATAP                    ...     PETITIONER
                   CHOUDHURY

                                                    -VERSUS-

                   STATE OF ODISHA                       ...   OPP.PARTY


06.   04.11.2020           The     matter   is   taken    up   through   Video
                   Conferencing.
                           Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
                   learned Counsel for the State.
                           This is an application under section 439 of
                   Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner in connection
                   with Aska P.S. Case No. 02 of 2016 corresponding to
                   G.R. Case No. 02(A) of 2016 pending in the Court of
                   J.M.F.C., Aska for alleged commission of offences under
                   sections 450, 376-D, 376(2)(n), 342, 323, 506/34 of the
                   Indian Penal Code and sections 25 and 27 of the Arms
                   Act.
                           The prayer for bail of the petitioner has been
                   rejected by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska by
                   order dated 24.01.2020.
                           Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
                   the petitioner is in judicial custody since 29.12.2019 and
                   he has been charge-sheeted under sections 450, 376-D,
                   376(2)(n), 342, 323, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code
                   and section 25(1-B)(a) of the Arms Act. It is further
                   contended that some of the co-accused persons have
                   already been released on bail and the occurrence in
                   question took place on 16.12.2015 and the F.I.R. was
           lodged    on   02.01.2016.     Learned     counsel    further
          submitted that the victim is a married lady having two
          children and the petitioner has been falsely entangled in
          the case and therefore, the bail application may be
          favourably considered.
                   Learned counsel for the State produced the case
          diary and placed the 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim,
          who is aged about 30 years.
                   Considering   the   submissions   of   the   learned
          counsel for the respective parties, the nature and gravity
          of accusation and the 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim
          in which she has categorically implicated the petitioner in
          the commission of rape, I am not inclined to release the
          petitioner on bail.
                   However, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his
          prayer for bail after examination of the victim in the trial
          Court.
                   The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.



                                              .............................
                                               S.K. Sahoo, J.

PKSahoo