Mini Jena v. State of Orissa
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner, alleged to have instigated rape of her daughter-in-law, was released on pre-arrest bail as there was no indication she would abscond or tamper with evidence.
What did the court decide?
Petitioner directed to be released on pre-arrest bail upon arrest by suitable terms and conditions.
What the court decided
ABLAPL No.12514 of 2016
03. 03.10.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned c
ounsel for the State.
The petitioner in this case having been implicated in Dasapalla P.S. C
ase No.67 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. Case No.97 of 2016 pending in the court of learned J.M
.F.C., Dasapalla for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 109/ 376 (2)(n)/
506/ 34 of the I.P.C., has filed this petition for her release on pre-arrest bail.
Allegation against the petitioner is that she instigated her husband t
o commit rape on their daughter-in-law.
Considering the nature of accusation against the petitioner and circum
stances in which the offences alleged to have been committed and also the fact that no materia
l being there indicating the fact that the petitioner shall abscond and/ or tamper with the pr
osecution evidence, if released on pre-arrest bail, this Court is of the view that the petitio
ner deserves to be released on pre-arrest bail.
Hence, this Court directs that in the event of arrest of the petitione
r in connection with the aforesaid case, she be released on pre-arrest bail by the Arresting O
fficer on such terms and conditions as the Arresting Officer may deem it just and proper.
The ABLAPL is accordingly disposed of being allowed.
Urgent certified copy of the order be granted on proper application.
..
S.Pujahari, J.
BJ
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner deserves pre-arrest bail in an IPC Section 376 instigation case.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
The Petitioner
- respondent
The State
Coram
S.Pujahari
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court