Orissa High Court
Meher Swain vs State Of Odisha .... Opp. Party on 5 October, 2021
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.2599 of 2021
Meher Swain .... Petitioner
Mr. Jyotirmaya Sahoo, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opp. Party
Mr. J.P.Patra,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 05.10.2021
04. The matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/ physical mode).
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case is now subjudiced in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska, Ganjam in S.T. Case No. 09 of 2021.
This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner in connection with Sheragada P.S. Case No.32 of 2018 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 09 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska for alleged commission of offences under sections 302, 120-B, 212/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 25(1-a) and 27 of the Arms Act.
// 2 // The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska, which was rejected on 22.03.2021.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 27.01.2021 and he has been charge sheeted under sections 302, 120-B, 212/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 25(1-a) and 27 of the Arms Act. It is further submitted that during the course of trial of the co-accused persons, three eye witnesses to the occurrence, namely, Jagannath Swain, Daka Gouda and Brundaban Jena were examined and they have not supported the prosecution case. Learned counsel further submitted that in view of the nature of evidence adduced during trial of the co-accused persons and the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, the bail application may be favourably considered. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the deposition copies of the aforesaid witnesses giving copies to the learned counsel for the State. On perusal of the evidence of those three eye witnesses, it appears that they have not supported the prosecution case for which they have been declared hostile.
Learned counsel for the State placed the evidence of Minati Swain as well as Swadhin Kumar Swain, who are the widow and brother of the deceased Krushna Swain respectively and it appears that both of them have not stated anything against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State however opposed the prayer for bail mainly on the ground that the petitioner was an absconder and he Page 2 of 3 // 3 // was arrested recently.
Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties, nature of accusation against the petitioner, nature of evidence adduced during trial of the co-accused persons and since the eye witnesses have not supported the prosecution case in the trial of the co- accused persons and they have not stated anything against the petitioner and further taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, I am inclined to him on bail.
Let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin over the matter with further conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper including the conditions that the petitioner shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date to which the case would be posted for trial and he shall not indulge in any criminal activities. Violation of any of the condition shall entail cancellation of bail.
BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
( S.K. Sahoo) Judge PKSahoo Page 3 of 3