Balabanta Kata vs State Of Odisha …. Opposite Party(S) on 22 January, 2025

0
133

Orissa High Court

Balabanta Kata vs State Of Odisha …. Opposite Party(S) on 22 January, 2025

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                   BLAPL No.12004 of 2024
                 Balabanta Kata                  ....                Petitioner(s)
                                                      Mr. R. N. Prusty, Advocate

                                           -versus-

             State of Odisha                     ....            Opposite Party(s)
                                                         Ms. S. Moharana, ASC

                     CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA


                                         ORDER

22.01.2025
Order No.

03. 1. This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

2. The petitioner is an accused in connection with S.T. Case

No.59 of 2024 arising out of C.T. Case No.79 of 2024

corresponding to Boden P.S. Case No.79 of 2024 for the offences

under Sections 294/304 of I.P.C. pending in the Court of the learned

Sessions Judge, Nuapada. The petitioner had approached before the

learned Court below praying for grant of bail. The learned Court

below vide its order dated 25.11.2024 has rejected the bail

application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has

filed the present petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. praying for

enlargement on bail.

Page 1 of 4

3. The prosecution case in short is that, on 18.03.2024, when

the marriage ceremony of the nephew of the informant was going

on and all the family members, friends, relatives and well-wishers

were engaged in the feast and merry making, at that time, another

nephew i.e. the petitioner in the present case unnecessarily picked

up quarreled with him. Seeing this, when informant’s husband

asked him not to create scene, the petitioner did not respond him

and abused him in the obscene languages. It is further alleged that

the petitioner pushed her husband, as a result of which, her husband

fell down on the hot water pot and sustained burn injury on his

portion. Therefore, he was taken to the hospital for treatment. But,

on 05.03.2024, during treatment, he had expired. Hence, the F.I.R.

4. All the vital witnesses to the prosecution have already been

examined. Out of thirteen witnesses, seven witnesses have been

examined. The injured witness has also been examined as P.W.6.

He in his deposition has very categorically stated that all of them

including the accused were in an inebriated condition when the

incident had taken place. The other witnesses have also deposed in

the similar line. It is apparent from the record that the accused-

petitioner as well as the other persons those who picked up the

quarrel with the petitioner leading to the incident were completely

Page 2 of 4
in drunken/inebriated condition. That perhaps the reason, the

prosecution has filed the present case for the alleged offence

punishable under Section 304 I.P.C. besides the other allied

offences.

5. Ms. Moharana, learned Additional Standing Counsel for

the State has vehemently opposed the bail on the ground that the

allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. The trial is

proceeding at an expected pace. Hence, at this stage, the petitioner

is not entitled to bail.

6. Regard being had to the period of custody from 20.03.2024

and the nature of accusation against the petitioner, I am inclined to

admit the petitioner on bail.

Hence, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail by

the Court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case on such

terms and conditions as it would deem just and proper, subject to

the following additional conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on each

date on which the case is posted for trial.

(ii) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court till

disposal of the trial.

Page 3 of 4

(iii) He shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner

whatsoever.

Violation of any of the conditions shall entail consideration

for cancellation of the bail granted to the petitioners. In the event,

any of the bail conditions are violated by the petitioners, the

prosecution is given liberty to move appropriate application before

the Court below for recalling the concession of bail. If such

application is moved, the trial Court should decide the application

on its own merit.

7. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Swarna

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SWARNAPRAVA DASH
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 23-Jan-2025 11:27:45

Page 4 of 4

[ad_1]

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here