Allowed

Bashanti Sahoo@Basanti Sahu v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC2 Nov 2018ABLAPL/13302/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a pre-arrest bail application filed by a grandmother-in-law accused of dowry-related torture resulting in the death of a grandchild. No direct evidence against her exists; bail granted upon surrender within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail granted upon surrender to the court in seisin within four weeks, subject to such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper.

Bashanti Sahoo@Basanti Sahu Vs State of Odisha — Dowry and Cruelty | Orissa HC (2018)

¶1

ABLAPL No.13302 of 2018

¶2

14.02.2019 The petitioner in this case having been implicated in Baisinga P.S. Case No.145 of 2018 corresponding to C.T. Case No.350 of 2018, pending in the court of the learned J.M.F.C., Betnoti for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 498-A/201/506/304/34 of IPC read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act has filed this petition for her release on pre-arrest bail.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶4

Perused the case diary.

¶5

It appears that the son of the present petitioner had married to one Subasini Mohapatra. But soon after such marriage, for non-fulfillment of illegal demand of dowry of her in-laws, the said Subasini Mohapatra was subjected to torture mentally as well as physically. The said Subasini Mohapatra gave birth a girl child and for the second time, when she was carrying, she was subjected to torture further, as a result of which, she became weak and gave birth a prematured girl child. Thereafter, she was brought back from the hospital with the girl child in spite of the advise of the doctor to allow them remain in hospital, as they need hospitalization and care. The girl child thereafter died and her body was disposed of.

¶6

It is the allegation of the informant, who happens to be the mother of Subasini Mohapatra that in spite of their effort to bring back the girl child and the Subasini Mohapatra when they were weak, her in-laws did not allow

¶7

¶8

them. The petitioner happens to be the grandmother-in-law of the child. No direct evidence is there against the petitioner to have killed the child. Investigation in this case is substantially progressed. Nothing is there on record indicating the fact that the petitioner shall abscond and/or tamper with the prosecution evidence, if released on bail.

¶9

Regard being had to the aforesaid facts and submissions made, especially the nature of accusation, character of supportive materials appearing against the petitioner in support of the charge, circumstances in which the offences alleged to have been committed, investigation in this case has been concluded and hardly any material being there to suggest that the petitioner is likely to abscond and/or tamper with the prosecution evidence, if released on bail, this Court directs that if the petitioner surrenders before the Court in seisin over the matter within four weeks hence and makes a motion for bail, the Court in seisin over the matter shall release her on bail in connection with the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it may deem just and proper.

¶10

The ABLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of being allowed. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶11

…………………..

¶12

S.Pujahari, J.

¶13

Bashanti Sahoo@Basanti Sahu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bashanti Sahoo@Basanti Sahu v. State of Odisha

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

Nityananda Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Birabara Das Vs State of Odisha

Madhu@Md Aslam Vs State of Odisha

Smruti Ranjan Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Jitu Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Siva Sankar Sharma Vs State of Odisha