Orissa High Court
Harish Jaiswal vs State Of Odisha …. Opposite Party on 15 April, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.1105 of 2025
Harish Jaiswal .... Petitioner
Mr. Dillip Kumar Mohanty, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. Manas Ranjan Mohanty, AGA
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
ORDER
15.04.2025
Order No.
01. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. The Petitioner is the accused in connection with
S.T. Case No.92 of 2017 pending in the Court of learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Jharsuguda, arising out of
Jharsuguda P.S. Case No.348 of 2017 for commission of
alleged offences under Sections 498(A)/302/304(B)/34 of
IPC read with Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application
for bail U/s. 439 of Cr.P.C by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Jharsuguda by order dated 06.11.2024
in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been
filed.
4. Heard Mr. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the
Petitioner so also Mr. M.R. Mohanty, learned Additional
Government Advocate for the State.
Page 1 of 5
5. A query being made, learned Counsel for the
Petitioner, 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.
6. This is the sixth journey of the Petitioner to this
Court. Earlier bail application of the Petitioner i.e. BLAPL
No.6146 of 2017 stood rejected vide order dated
20.11.2018 directing the learned Court in seisin to
conclude the trial within a period of six months from the
date of receipt of the said order, if there is no other legal
impediment. BLAPL No.8838 of 2019 stood disposed of
on 02.12.2020, as the same was withdrawn by the
learned Counsel for the Petitioner. BLAPL No.7606 of
2021 was disposed of on 20.02.2023 by releasing the
Petitioner on interim bail for a period of three months
from the date of release. BLAPL No.7744 of 2023 &
BLAPL No.1665 of 2024 were also disposed of vide orders
dated 13.10.2023 & 19.07.2024 respectively granting
interim bail for a period of three months in each of the
said bail applications.
7. Mr. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the Petitioner
submits, the deceased was mentally sick and was very
short tempered and having abnormal behaviour and the
Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case
for alleged offences punishable under Sections
498(A)/302/304(B)/34 of IPC and Section 4 of D.P. Act.
The Petitioner is in judicial custody since 10.06.2017
excepting for the period for which he was released on
Page 2 of 5
interim bails. Mr. Mohanty further submits, the mother
of the Petitioner, who is the co-accused in the present
case, after her release on bail, died on 19th August,
2024, who was taking care of the minor son of the
Petitioner, who is around 9 years old at present. After the
death of his mother, nobody is there to take care of the
minor son of the Petitioner and the son is leading almost
a destitute life.
8. Mr. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the Petitioner
further submits that out of 49 charge sheeted witnesses,
only 09 witnesses have been examined till date and the
conclusion of the trial may take much time and the
Petitioner is in custody for more than seven years.
9. Mr. Mohanty submits, after availing the interim
bails, on each occasion the Petitioner surrendered in
right time before the learned trial Court.
10. Mr. Mohanty, learned Counsel, relying on the order
of the Supreme Court in Javed Shah Abdul Shah Vs.
State of Maharashtra and Another, reported in (2023)
92 OCR (SC)-898, submitted that in view of the period of
incarceration of the Petitioner, he should be released on
bail by imposing any conditions, as this Court deems
just and proper.
11. Mr. M.R. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the State,
drawing attention of this Court to the observations made
by the learned trial Court in the impugned order so also
observation of the coordinate Bench regarding dying
declaration of the deceased opposes to such prayer for
bail.
Page 3 of 5
12. Considering the submissions made by the learned
Counsel for the respective parties, this Court is not
inclined to release the Petitioner on bail. However, at this
stage, learned Counsel for the Petitioner prays for release
of the Petitioner on interim bail for a period of six months
demonstrating his past conduct regarding compliance of
the previous orders of this Court so also the condition of
the minor son of the Petitioner after the death of his
mother, who was taking care of his son.
13. Taking into consideration the submission made by
the learned Counsel for the respective parties and the
facts detailed above as to the death of Petitioner’s mother
so also present condition of his minor son, who is
languishing a destitute life, detention of the Petitioner in
judicial custody for about seven years, slow progress of
the trial and the conduct of the Petitioner in complying
with the earlier orders of interim bail granted by this
Court, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on
interim bail for a period of six months from the date of
release of the Petitioner on such terms and conditions,
to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin.
14. The Petitioner shall surrender before the learned
trial Court immediately on expiry of the six months
period. While on interim bail, the Petitioner shall appear
before the trial Court on each date to which the case
would be posted for hearing and will co-operate with the
learned trial Court for disposal of the case.
15. It is expected that the learned trial Court will do
well to examine the material witnesses preferentially
Page 4 of 5
before the formal witnesses and so also do well to
expedite the trial in the aforementioned case and
conclude the same at the earliest.
16. With the said observation and direction, the BLAPL
stands disposed of.
17. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on
proper application.
(S.K. Mishra)
Mona
Judge
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: MONALISA SWAIN
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 16-Apr-2025 20:16:44
Page 5 of 5