Orissa High Court
Tukuna Choudhury vs State Of Odisha .... Opp. Party on 9 August, 2021
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.464 of 2021
Tukuna Choudhury .... Petitioner
Mr. Manoranjan Acharya, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opp. Party
Mr. D.K. Pani,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 09.08.2021
04. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Video Conferencing/Physical Mode).
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Aska P.S. Case No.406 of 2019 corresponding to S.T. Case No.40 of 2020 pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska for alleged commission of offences under sections 498-A/302/304- B/316/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act.
The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Aska, which was rejected on 12.11.2020.
// 2 // Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased Mamali Choudhury and he is in judicial custody since 03.11.2019 and charge sheet has been submitted for the offences under sections 498-A/302/304-B/316/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 4 of the D.P. Act. He further submits that the marriage of the petitioner and the deceased was solemnized in the year 2013 and the occurrence in question took place on 30.10.2019 and the dying declaration of the deceased which was recorded by the Executive Magistrate while she was undergoing treatment at M.K.C.G. Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur indicates that her husband (petitioner) was physically torturing her for which on 30.10.2019 at about 7.00 a.m., she poured Kerosene on her body and set herself on fire. He further submits that during course of treatment, the deceased died on 04.11.2019. It is argued that in view of the dying declaration of the deceased, the submission of charge sheet under sections 302 and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code is not proper and justified and since charge has not been framed till date even though the case has been committed to the Court of Session, therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties, nature of accusation against the petitioner, dying declaration of the deceased, surrounding Page 2 of 3 // 3 // circumstances under which the deceased sustained burn injuries and taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, I am inclined to release the petitioner 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 such other conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper subject to the conditions that the petitioner shall not come in contact with the prosecution witnesses and shall not tamper with the evidence, he shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date to which the case would be posted for trial. Violation of any of the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.
The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
( S.K. Sahoo) Judge Jagabandhu Page 3 of 3