Allowed

Deepak@Deepak Ku.Biswal v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC5 Apr 2016BLAPL/444/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court released the petitioner on bail in a G.R. case involving murder and other offences. The court noted the lack of eyewitnesses and the reliance of the prosecution on a co-accused who had already been released.

What did the court decide?

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

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 G.R. Case No.925 o f 2015 arising out of Dharmasala P.S. Case No.261 of 2015 pending in the Court of learned J.M. F.C., Chandikhole for offences punishable under sections 302/394/120-B/201/364/34 of IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 03. 10.2015 and in the meantime after completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted under sections 302/394/120-B/ 201/364/34 of Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel further s ubmits that there are no eye witnesses to the occurrence and entire case of the prosecution is based on the confessional statement of co-accused Chandan Kumar Das and the said co-accused h as already been released on bail in BLAPL No.1152 of 2016 vide order dated 15.3.2016. In suppo rt of such contention, learned counsel for the petitioner files a copy of the bail order which is kept on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that taking into accoun t the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, the bail application of the p etitioner may be favourbaly considered.

diary and fairly submits that except the confessional statement of the co-accused, there is no other material against the petitioner and even the co-accused has also not stated that at the time of incident, the petitioner was present inside the vehicle where the murder took place. Considering the submissions made by the respective parties, the nature of accusation a gainst the petitioner, period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody and the fact that there are no eye witnesses to the occurrence and taking into account the nature of circum stantial evidence available on record against the petitioner, I am inclined to release the pet itioner on bail.

Let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond o f Rs.20,000.00 (rupees twenty thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter with further terms and conditions as t he learned Court may deem just and proper. Accordingly, the BLAPL is disposed of.

Deepak@Deepak Ku.Biswal v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak@Deepak Ku.Biswal 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

Case details

Similar cases

Durjya Karkaria@Naik Vs State of Orissa

Basanti Pradhani Vs State of Orissa

Manoj Mandal Vs State of Orissa

Ajoy Kumar Nayak Vs State of Orissa

Nilakantha Pani Vs State of Orissa

Dillip Kumar Champatiray Vs State of Orissa