Orissa High Court
Bijay Bhainsa vs State Of Orissa ... Opposite Party on 21 July, 2023
Author: G. Satapathy
Bench: G. Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.4422 of 2023
Bijay Bhainsa ... Petitioner
Mr. B. Sahoo, Advocate
-versus-
State of Orissa ... Opposite Party
Mr. S.S. Pradhan, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
ORDER
21.07.2023 Order No.
03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. This is a bail application U/S.439 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Laikera P.S. Case No.41 of 2023 arising out of C.T. Case No.287 of 2023 pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M., Jharsuguda, for commission of offence punishable under Sections 341/326-A/307/506/34 of IPC, on the allegation of engaging contract killer to kill the victim by throwing acid.
3. In the course of hearing of the bail application, Mr. B. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely no direct evidence available against the present petitioner and the so called allegation against the petitioner for engaging contract killer on the request of one Page 1 of 4 Purnami Kechu, appears to be false and motivated and even on going through the statement of the victim, nothing was found to have stated by her against the petitioner. It is also submitted by him by placing the facts mentioned in the charge-sheet that the persons, who were responsible for causing burn injury to the victim, had taken cash of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) from co-accused Purnami Kechu and it, thereby, falsifies the claim of the Investigating Agency that the petitioner had conspired and engaged the contract killers to kill the victim. On these grounds, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to grant bail to the petitioner.
4. On the other hand, Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned AGA while not disputing about the availability of any direct evidence against the present petitioner, he submits that there is of course a prima facie case made out against the petitioner for engaging some henchmen to eliminate the victim and in the process facilitated the attack on the victim who having yet to be discharged from the hospital, it would be risky to grant bail to the petitioner as there is every likelihood of the petitioner repeating the offence again. Accordingly, learned AGA prays to reject the bail application of the petitioner.
5. After having considered the rival submissions made and taking into consideration the nature and Page 2 of 4 gravity of accusations raised against the petitioner and keeping in view the absence of any direct evidence against the present petitioner and regard being had to the pre trial detention of the petitioner since 06.03.2023 with submission of charge-sheet in the meanwhile and on going through the statement of victim in which no reference has been made against the present petitioner and considering the principle that bail is the rule but jail is the exception, this Court admits the petitioner to bail.
6. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed and the petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it with following conditions:-
(i) the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail,
(ii) the petitioner shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless his attendance is dispensed with,
(iii) the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case and
(iv) the petitioner shall report attendance before the Jurisdictional Police Station once in a week preferably on Sunday in between 10 A.M. to 12 Noon for six(06) Page 3 of 4 months from the actual date of release from the custody.
The I.I.C. of Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the petitioner unnecessarily after recording his attendance beyond the time as stipulated.
It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the petitioner in future for grave and serious offences on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case.
This order may not constitute as precedent for grant of bail to co-accused persons.
7. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.
8. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.
(G. Satapathy) Judge Subhasmita Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA DAS Designation: Jr.Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 22-Jul-2023 12:54:54 Page 4 of 4