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 13, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Rakesh Kumar Jena vs Vrs on 3 February, 2021

Author: Savitri Ratho

Bench: Savitri Ratho

                                   BLAPL No. 7458 of 2020




                     Rakesh Kumar Jena                 ....      Petitioner
                                      -Vrs.-
                     State of Odisha                   ....      Opp. party


0 03.   03.02.2021           Heard Mr. S. Mohanty, learned counsel for the
                     petitioner and Mr. Sk. Zafrullah, learned Addl. Standing
                     Counsel for the State through Video Conferencing mode.
                            This is an application under Section 439 of
                     Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner- Rakesh Kumar
                     Jena in connection with Kendrapara Town P.S. Case
                     No.119 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1008 of
                     2020 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M.,
                     Kendrapara    registered   for   commission   of   offence
                     punishable under Sections 341/ 342/ 323/ 363/ 365/
                     354(B)/ 279/ 337/ 338/ 379/34 of I.P.C.
                             The petitioner had moved an application for bail
                     before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Kendrapara
                     which was rejected on 12.10.2020.
                             The prosecution allegations in brief are that on
                     26.06.2020, at about 11 A.M., while the informant-victim
                     was waiting for the arrival of her brother at Tinimuhani
                     Chhak, Kendrapara, the accused-petitioner arrived at the
                     spot and told her that her mother had met with an
                     accident and had been shifted to S.C.B. Medical College &
                     Hospital, Cuttack. So, the victim-informant accompanied
                     the accused-petitioner in his motor-cycle to Cuttack. Near
                     Salepur when the accused-petitioner turned his bike
                     towards Salepur Canel road, the informant protested.
                     Then the accused-petitioner parked his motor-cycle in a
                                    2




          lonely place and dragged the informant-victim behind an
          abandoned house. When the informant-victim shouted,
          the accused-petitioner deal a fist blow on her nose,
          causing bleeding injury. Hearing her shouts one person
          arrived at the spot. But the accused-petitioner told him
          that the informant-victim had fallen from the bike and he
          was taking her to the Hospital. While they were returning
          to Kendrapara, near Nischintakoili, one Tata Ace Vehicle
          dashed against the bike of the accused-petitioner as a
          result of which the informant-victim fell down and
          sustained severe injuries on her person. She was shifted
          to CHC, Nischintakoili for treatment and when her health
          condition became serious, she was referred to S.C.B.
          Medical College & Hospital, Cuttack and was shifted to the
          ICU of Srushti, Hospital, Cuttack and was discharged on
          06.07.2020. After her recovery, she has lodged an FIR on
          21.07.2020 leading to registration of case under Sections
          341/ 342/ 323/ 363/ 365/ 354(B)/ 279/ 337/ 338/
          379/34 of I.P.C.
                   Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the
          petitioner and the victim are known to each other and
Sukanta
          she sustained injures as the vehicle met with an accident
          and she has made false allegations against the petitioner
          of use of force. He further submits that the petitioner is in
          custody since 18.09.2020 and investigation has been
          completed in the meanwhile.
                   Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the
          State opposed the prayer for bail and placed the
          statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the
                              3




victim and further stated that the accused-petitioner had
attempted to commit sexual assault on the victim by
taking her to a lonely spot after stating falsehood but was
prevented by arrival of an outsider and he has hit her and
caused grievous injury on her nose. Hence, the petitioner
does not deserve to be released on bail.
         Considering the respective submissions, nature of
allegations       against the petitioner, the discharge of the
injured-victim from the hospital and the period of
detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, I am
inclined to allow this application for bail.
            Let   the   petitioner-   Rakesh Kumar Jena be
released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be
fixed by the learned Court below in seisin over the
matter, including the following conditions :


   1. He will not indulge in any criminal activity while on
         bail.
   2. He will not threaten or try to influence prosecution
         witnesses while on bail.
         The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
        Violation of any condition will entail in cancellation of
bail.

                                      ..........................
                                       Savitri Ratho, J.

4