Allowed

Dushmant Kumar Sahoo@Bibhuti v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC19 Apr 2016BLAPL/254/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court judge granted bail to a husband accused under IPC 302/498-A in a domestic homicide case. The court relied on the absence of direct evidence placing the petitioner at the crime scene and his extended period of detention, distinguishing his case from other co-accused who had earlier bail orders.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.20,000 with two solvent sureties each for the like amount.

19.4.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with C.T.(S) Case No.80 of 2015 arising out of Rengali Dam Site P.S. Case No.36 of 2015 pending in the Court of learn ed Addl. Sessions Judge, Talcher for offences punishable under sections 498-A/302/304(B)/ 201/ 34 of Indian Penal Code read with section 4 of the D.P. Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the husband of the d eceased Minati Sahoo and he is in custody since 8.7.2015 and he has been charge sheeted under sections 498-A/302/304(B)/ 201/34 of Indian Penal Code read with section 4 of the D.P. Act. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the marriage between the petitio ner and the deceased was solemnized eight years prior to the occurrence and they were blessed with a daughter and due to dissention between the parties, the deceased was staying separately from the petitioner and other in-laws and on the occurrence night i.e., 4.7.2015, there are n o material regarding the presence of the petitioner in the house. Learned counsel for the peti tioner further contended that the co-accused persons namely Daitari Sahoo, Smt.

Kadali Sahoo and Miss. Padmini Sahoo @ Tuni have already been released on bail in BLAPL No.644 1 of 2015 vide order dated 3.12.2015 and therefore taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourab ly considered.

Learned counsel for the State has produced the case diary and placed the post mortem r eport which indicates that the cause of death of the deceased was on account of asphyxia which is homicidal in nature. He also placed the statement of Dolagobinda Pradhan and Dalimba Pradh an, who is the sister-in-law of the deceased.

Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the respective parties, the na ture of accusations against the petitioner, absence of any direct evidence or specific materia l to indicate that the petitioner was present in the house in question on the date of occurren ce and absence of any material to show that the petitioner was residing with the deceased in t he same house and taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial cu stody, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

Let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bo nd of Rs.20,000.00 (rupees twenty thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the l ike amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter with further terms and conditions as the learned

Dushmant Kumar Sahoo@Bibhuti v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dushmant Kumar Sahoo@Bibhuti v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bijaya Garadia Vs State of Orissa

Nirupama Seth Vs State of Orissa

Tulu@Prafulla Kumar Pradhan Vs State of Orissa

Bansidhar Nayak Vs State of Orissa

Bijay Sindur Vs State of Orissa

Prakash Kahali Vs State of Orissa