Allowed

Ambuja Sahoo v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC5 Jan 2017BLAPL/7725/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants bail to a petitioner charged under Sections 365/395 IPC, who was alleged to be a passenger in a vehicle with stolen material. The court held the petitioner did not apply force and is a local resident.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties for like amount, subject to appearance, no witness tampering, and no offence during bail.

Ambuja Sahoo Vs State of Orissa — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2017)

¶1

BLAPL No.7725 of 2016

¶2

03. 05.01.2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and t
he learned State Counsel on the application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for release of the petit
ioner bail who allegedly involved with the offence under Sections 365/395 of the IPC.
 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no recovery o
f any stolen material from the possession of the present petitioner and the petitioner was onl
y a passenger in the vehicle, but the police has falsely implicated in this case for which len
ient view may be taken to release the petitioner on bail on any condition as deemed just and p
roper. Learned State Counsel opposes the prayer for bail.

¶3

 3. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parti
es regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case including the statement of the
victim and other witness showing no applied force by the petitioner, fact that the victim has
already been rescued in the meantime and taking note the nature of offence and allegation and
the fact that the petitioner being a local person, there is no chance of his absconding or inf
luencing the witnesses, let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5
0,000.00 (rupees fifty thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the sat
isfaction of the learned J.M.F.C., Narasinghpur in C.T. Case No.196 of 2016 with the condition
 that (1) The petitioner shall appear before the IO at 10:00 AM on each Sunday till submission
 of the final form; (ii) he shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly or indire
ctly and (iii) he shall not commit any offence while on bail.

¶4

 Violation of any of the aforesaid terms shall entail cancellation of t

¶5

he bail.

¶6

 Accordingly the BLAPL is disposed of.
 Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶7

 Dr.D.P.Choudhury,J

¶8

Basu

¶9

- 2 -

Ambuja Sahoo v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambuja Sahoo 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

Mahendra Pradhan@Padhan Vs State of Orissa

K.Anita Majhi@Kalari Majhi Vs State of Orissa

Bimal Kumar Mishra Vs State of Orissa

Ramakanta Mohapatra Vs State of Odisha

Ananta Kanhar Vs State of Orissa

Dhapu@Basanta Dora Vs State of Orissa