Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Orissa High Court

Sanu Patra vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 20 December, 2024

Author: V. Narasingh

Bench: V. Narasingh

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                             BLAPL No.11396 of 2024

             Sanu Patra                      ....            Petitioner
                                       Mr. R.K. Pattanaik, Advocate

                                   -versus-

             State of Odisha                 ....     Opposite Party
                                              Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC
                                          Ms. A.K. Nayak, Advocate
                                                       (Informant)
                       CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
                                         ORDER

20.12.2024 Order No.

01. 1. Ms. A.K. Nayak, learned counsel, engaged by District Legal Service Authority, Kandhamal, Phulbani, has entered appearance on behalf of the informant by filing Vaklatanama in Court. The same is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant.

3. The Petitioner is an accused in connection with C.T. Case No.23 of 2024 pending on the file of learned Ad-hoc Additional District and Sessions Judge(FTSC), Kandhamal, Bamunigaon P.S. Case No.30 of 2024 for commission of offence alleged under Sections 341/376(2)(n) and 506 of IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 .

4. Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. case is pending in any other Court.

5. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) by the learned Ad-hoc Additional District and Sessions Judge(FTSC), Kandhamal, Phulbani by order dated 23.10.2024 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

6. It is submitted by the learned counsel that he is in custody since 22.04.2024 and as in the meanwhile charge sheet has been filed, his further continuance in custody is not warranted.

7. Learned counsel for the State as well as the learned counsel for the Informant opposes the prayer.

8. This Court perused the 164 Cr.P.C statement of the victim.

9. Considering the same, this Court is not inclined to entertain the bail application at this stage.

10. Liberty is granted to the Petitioner to renew his prayer after examination of the victim. IN the event such application is filed, the same shall be considered by the learned Court in seisin independently.

11. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

(V. NARASINGH) Judge Soumya Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SOUMYA RANJAN SAMAL Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 23-Dec-2024 21:17:49 Page 3 of 3