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 3, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

BLAPL/1872/2018 on 8 May, 2018

Author: S. K. Sahoo

Bench: S. K. Sahoo

                                       BLAPL No.1872 of 2018




02. 08.05.2018               Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
                 learned counsel for the State.
                             This is an application under section 439 Cr.P.C.
                 in connection with S.T. Case No.60 of 2017 arising out of
                 Khariar P.S. Case No.104 of 2017 pending in the Court of
                 learned Sessions Judge, Nuapada for offences punishable
                 under sections 302/404 of the Indian Penal Code.
                             The petitioner moved an application for bail
                 before the learned Sessions Judge, Nuapada which was
                 rejected on 15.02.2018.
                             Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
                 the petitioner is in custody since 05.06.2017 and he has
                 been charge sheeted under sections 302/404 of the Indian
                 Penal Code. It is contended by the learned counsel for the
                 petitioner that the occurrence in question stated to have
                 taken place on 28.05.2017 and the FIR was lodged on
                 29.05.2017 against unknown persons. He further submits
                 that there are no eye witnesses to the occurrence and it is
                 the   prosecution     case    that   the   petitioner   had   illicit
                 relationship with the deceased who is a married lady and
                 the petitioner also a married person and it is further
                 prosecution case that some ornaments of the deceased
                 were recovered at the instance of the petitioner. He further
                 submits   that   no    test   identification   parade   has   been
                 conducted relating to such ornaments and at a belated
p                stage everything has been staged managed to falsely
                 entangle the petitioner in the alleged crime and therefore,
                       2




the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably
considered.
      Learned counsel for the State has produced the case
diary and opposed the prayer for bail and placed the
seizure list which shows recovery of gold ornaments.
      Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsels for the respective parties, the nature of accusation
against the petitioner, absence of any direct evidence,
nature of circumstantial evidence available on record and
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.20,000.00 (rupees
twenty thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the
matter with further terms and conditions as the learned
Court may deem just and proper.
      Accordingly, the BLAPL is disposed of.
      Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on
proper application.
                                     .......................
                                     S. K. Sahoo, J.

3 4 5