Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 203 (ORI)

BASANTA NAHAK v. STATE OF ODISHA

2016-03-11

S.K.SAHOO

body2016
JUDGMENT : S.K. Sahoo, J. - Misc. Case No.66 of 2016. In view of the memo filed by the learned counsel for the appellant no.1 - Basanta Nahaka, the misc. case is disposed of as withdrawn. 2. Accordingly, the BLAPL is disposed of as withdrawn. 3. Application disposed of. Misc. Case No. 169 of 2015 . 4. This is an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail of appellant no.2 Bichhei Behera. 5. Heard. 6. The appellant no.2 has been convicted by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Sambalpur in S.T. Case No. 18/30 of 2011 under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand), in default, to undergo further R.I. for three months for the offence under section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for one year for commission of offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act and both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant no.2-petitioner submits that the occurrence took place in the intervening night of on 8/9.7.2010 and the first information report s clearly indicates that the culprits were wearing black masks at the time of occurrence. She further submitted that the petitioner was taken into custody on 18.7.2010 and one month thereafter T.I. parade was conducted and it is the prosecution case that P.W. 4 identified the petitioner in the T.I. parade. She further submitted that the petitioner is in custody for more than five and half years and there is no chance of early hearing of the appeal in near future and therefore, taking into account the nature of evidence available on record and period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody I the bail application may be favourably considered. 8. Learned counsel for the State while opposing prayer for bail placed the impugned judgment of the learned Trial Court in Para-13 wherein it is mentioned that P. W. 4 identified the petitioner in the T.I. parade which was conducted by P. W. 12-Chinmayee Dehury, judicial Magistrate on 18.8.2010 at Circle Jail, Sambalpur. 9. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 10. 9. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 10. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the respective parties, nature of evidence available on record, the fact that it is a case of single identification so far as the petitioner is concerned and taking into account the period already undergone by the petitioner in judicial custody and absence of any chance of early hearing of the appeal in near future, I am inclined to released the petitioner on bail. 11. Let the petitioner-appellant no.2 Bichhei Behera be released on bail pending for disposal of the appeal on furnishing personal bond of Rs.20,000 (rupees twenty thousand) with two solvent local sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Sambalpur. 12. The Misc. Case is disposed of. 13. Misc. Case disposed of. Misc. Case No.99 of 2016 14. This is an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail of appellant no.3-Amulya Rout. 15. Heard. 16. The appellant no.3 has been convicted by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Sambalpur in S.T. Case No.18/30 of 2011 under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand), in default, to undergo further R.I. for three months for the offence under section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for one year for commission of offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act and both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 17. Learned counsel for the appellant no.3-petitioner submits that the occurrence took place in the intervening night of on 8/9.7.2010 and the first information report clearly indicates that the culprits were wearing black masks at the time of occurrence. She further submitted that the petitioner was taken into custody on 18.7.2010 and one month thereafter T.I. parade was conducted and it is the prosecution case that P.W. 4 identified the petitioner in the T.I. parade. She further submitted that the petitioner is in custody for more than five and half years and there is no chance of early hearing of the appeal in near future and therefore, taking into account the nature of evidence available on record and period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, the bail application may be favourably considered. She further submitted that the petitioner is in custody for more than five and half years and there is no chance of early hearing of the appeal in near future and therefore, taking into account the nature of evidence available on record and period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, the bail application may be favourably considered. 18. Learned counsel for the State while opposing prayer for bail placed the impugned judgment of the learned Trial Court in Para-13 wherein it is mentioned that P, W. 4 identified the petitioner in the T.I. parade which was conducted by P. W. 12-Chinmayee Dehury, Judicial Magistrate on 18.8.2010 at Circle Jail, Sambalpur. 19. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 20. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the respective parties, nature of evidence available on record, the fact that it is a case of single identification so far as the petitioner is concerned and taking into account the period already undergone by the petitioner in judicial custody and absence of any chance of early hearing of the appeal in near future, I am inclined to released the petitioner on bail. 21. Let the petitioner-appellant no.3 Amulya Rout be released on bail pending for disposal of the appeal on furnishing personal bond of Rs.20,000 (rupees twenty thousand) with two solvent local sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Sambalpur. 22. The Misc. Case is disposed of. 23. Misc. Case disposed of. Misc. Case No.25 of 2016 24. This is an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail of appellant no.1 - Basanta Nahaka. 25. Since the appellant no.1 - petitioner has been identified by two identifying witnesses P. W. 2 namely Smt. Renuka Gardia and P.W.4 Bibhuti Bhusan Gardia, I am not inclined to release him on bail. 26. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of appellant no.1 Basanta Nahaka stands rejected.