[ad_1]
Orissa High Court
Runubala Bhatta vs State Of Odisha …. Opposite Party on 21 April, 2025
Author: S.K. Panigrahi
Bench: S.K. Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No. 2118 of 2025
Runubala Bhatta .... Petitioner
Mr. Gopal Krishna Nayak,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr.Debasish Nayak, AGA
CORAM:
DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
Order ORDER
No. 12.04.2025
F.I.R. Dated Police Case No. and Sections
No. Station Courts' Name
398 17.09.2024 Puri T.R. Case Section
No.106 of 376(2)(n)/376(3)/114/
Sadar
2024 342/294/109/506/323/34
corresponding of the IPC read with
to Special G.R. Section-6 of the
Case No.89 of POCSO Act, 2012.
2024 pending
in the court of
learned Addl.
District Judge-
cum-Special
Court under
POCSO Act,
Puri.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.
Page 1 of 4
3. The petitioner being in custody in connection with T.R. Case
No.106 of 2024 corresponding to Special G.R. Case No.89 of
2024 pending in the court of learned Addl. District Judge-cum-
Special Court under POCSO Act, Puri, registered for the
alleged commission of offence under Sections
376(2)(n)/376(3)/114/ 342/294/109/506/323/34 of the IPC read
with Section-6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, has filed this petition
for her release on bail.
4. The fact of the prosecution case is that the victim /Informant
was suffering from some health issue, so the present petitioner
suggested her to before a naturopathy doctor who can help her
out. On 07.05.2023, the present Petitioner, Naturopathy Doctor
and another accused namely, Monalisa Sahu took her to her
rented house. Then all the accused persons tied her and
committed rape on her. It was alleged that present Petitioner
took videography of who event through her mobile phone. The
accused persons threatened her that, if she informs her family
members then she will viral all the videos. Then after
somedays, the accused persons again threatened and again
committed rape. One month after the above incident, the
present petitioner went to the victim’s house, convinced her
parents that an evil spirit possessed her and needed to be
removed, and subsequently committed rape on her. Then one
day when victim threatened that she will inform about all the
Page 2 of 4
incident to her family members then one of the accused on
pretext of same story reached her house beat her mercilessly.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner
is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this
case. He further submits that the only allegation against the
Petitioner is that she has recorded the entire event of the
incident through her mobile phone and there is no iota of
evidence about the record of the incident in her mobile to
implicate the Petitioner in this case. He further submits that the
Petitioner is in custody since 27.01.2025. Hence, he submits that
the Petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
6. Pursuant to the rejection order dated 18.01.2025 passed by
learned Court below, learned counsel for the State as well as
learned counsel for the Informant/Victim pressing the relevant
portion of the statement of the Victim/Informant recorded
under section-164 of the Cr.P.C. The said statement is as
hereunder:-
“On 27th April 2023, a Puja was convened in the rented
house of Runu Miss. There in connivance with a Puja,
they given me “Bela Pana” to drink by Runu Miss and
her colleague Monalisha Sahu and Doctor @ Tantrika
Shibani Shankar tied me up in a cot and Runu Miss
also tied my hands by her Chuni Thereafter, when I
opposed to record the same, Sibani Sankar kept sexual
relationship with me with the help of Monalisha Sahu
and Runu Miss without my consent and recorded the
same through mobile phone by Runu. Thereafter, they
taken away my mobile phone and they did not allow
me to contact my parents. On the next day, when I felt
fever, they kept in custody in a room and threatened
me to take away the life of her parents and her brother,Page 3 of 4
if she disclose the matter to any one. Like this, three
times they have committed rape by Sibani Shankar
Mohapatra with the help of co-accused persons-
Monalisha, Runu Miss.”.
7. Considering the nature and gravity of the accusation, character
of evidence appearing against the Petitioner as well as the
statement of the victim/Informant recorded under section-164 of
the Cr.P.C., the stringent punishment provided and that there are
reasonable grounds for believing that the Petitioner is not guilty of
the offence alleged or not likely to commit any such offence, which
is not possible to record in this case, the prayer for bail is devoid of
merit. Hence, his prayer for bail stands rejected. However, the
learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude it
at the earliest.
8. The BLAPL is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)
Judge
Narayan
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: NARAYAN HO
Reason: Authentication
Location: OHC
Date: 23-Apr-2025 16:26:37
Page 4 of 4
[ad_2]
Source link