Orissa High Court
Asif Alli vs State Of Odisha …. Opposite Party(S) on 20 January, 2025
Author: S.K. Panigrahi
Bench: S.K. Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ABLAPL No.14330 of 2024
Asif Alli .... Petitioner(s)
Ms. Diptimayee Lenka, Adv.
-versus-
1.
State of Odisha …. Opposite Party(s)
2. Nayana Mallick
Mrs.J. Sahoo, ASC
CORAM:
DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
Order ORDER
No. 20.01.2025
FIR Dated Police Case No. and Sections
No. Station Courts’ Name
247 04.09.2019 Tirtol C.T. Case No.153 of Sections 341,323,324,
2019 corresponding 307,354, 294,509, 506,34
to Tirtol P.S. Case of the IPC read with
No.247 of 2019 Section 3(1)/3(2)(va) of
pending in the SC/ST (POA) Act
Court of learned
Additional Sessions
Judge,
Jagatsinghpur
03. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
3. The Petitioner herein is apprehending arrest in C.T.
Case No.153 of 2019 corresponding to Tirtol P.S. Case
No.247 of 2019 pending in the Court of learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Jagatsinghpur for commission of offences
Page 1 of 3
under Sections 341,323,324, 307,354, 294,509, 506,34 of the
IPC read with Section 3(1)/3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
4. Perused the allegation made in the F.I.R.
5. The brief fact of the case is that while emersion process
of lord Ganesh was proceeded towards river, on the way
near Dwija Sahoo Chhak, one Muntejim arrived there and
passed obscene comments and took photographs of
women by his mobile phone. When the husband of the
informant along with others protested, he abused them in
filthy languages and assaulted them, for which they
sustained injuries on their persons.
6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the
Petitioner is an innocent person and a false case has been
foisted against him. He has no nexus with the alleged
offences. The investigation of the case has already been
completed. She, accordingly, prays for allowing the prayer
of the Petitioner.
7. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the
bail prayer of the Petitioner.
8. Considering the submissions made on behalf of both the
parties, looking to the factum of the case and since there is
no dispute that release of the Petitioner on anticipatory
bail shall not be a hindrance to a free and fair
investigation, this Court is of the view that the Petitioner
has made out a case for his release on anticipatory bail,
Page 2 of 3
more particularly when he is ready and willing to
cooperate the investigation. There is also no chance of
absconding and/or tampering with the prosecution
evidence or influence any witness, if the Petitioner is
released on anticipatory bail.
9. Hence, this Court directs that in the event of arrest of the
Petitioner in connection with the aforesaid case, he be
released on pre-arrest bail by the Officer effecting arrest on
some stringent terms and conditions as deemed just and
proper with further conditions that:
i. the Petitioner shall cooperate the process of
investigation;
ii. the Petitioner shall not indulge herself in any
criminal activities in future;
iii. the Petitioner shall not tamper the evidence of
the prosecution witnesses in any manner;
Violation of any of the above conditions shall entailcancellation of the bail.
10. The ABLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.
(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)
Judge
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK
Designation: AR-CUM-SR. SECRETARY
Gitanjali
Reason: Authentication
Location: OHC
Date: 21-Jan-2025 18:23:22
Page 3 of 3
[ad_1]
Source link