Allowed

Hakim@Harbhajan Singh v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC7 Dec 2018BLAPL/5070/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the Court set aside the lower court's rejection order. Relying on the identifying witness's trial statement admitting identification via photographs rather than the parade, the Court found the parade sanctity compromised and granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000 each with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount.

Hakim@Harbhajan Singh Vs State of Odisha — Narcotics (NDPS) | Orissa HC (2018)

¶1

BLAPL No.5070 of 2018

¶2

07.12.2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

¶3

This is an application under section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with C.T. Case No.357 of 2017 arising out of Betnoti P.S. Case No.141 of 2017 pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-II, Baripada for offences punishable under sections 457/395/342 of the Indian Penal Code read with sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.

¶4

The petitioners moved an application for bail before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-II, Baripada which was rejected on 06.06.2018.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody since 17.01.2018 and though the earlier bail application of the petitioners was rejected in BLAPL No.855 of 2018 relying on the fact that the petitioners were identified in the T.I. parade but in the meantime, the informant has been examined in the trial as P.W.3 and he has stated that he had seen the photographs of the accused persons on the notice board in the Circle Jail and thereafter he identified them in the T.I. parade. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in view of such statement of the identifying witness, the sanctity of the T.I. parade is lost and therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered. Learned counsel for the petitioners files the certified copy of the deposition which is taken on record.

¶6

¶7

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of accusation against the petitioners, the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, the statement of the informant in the trial Court, I am inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail and direct the petitioners to be released on bail.

¶9

Let the petitioners be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/(rupees twenty thousand) each with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction for the Court in seisin over the matter with further terms and conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper.

¶10

Accordingly, the BLAPL is disposed of.

¶11

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

…………………..

S. K. Sahoo, J.

sisir

Hakim@Harbhajan Singh v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hakim@Harbhajan Singh 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

Ram Krushna Jena Vs State of Orissa

Birasingh Say Vs State

Biswanath Patra Vs State

Tapan Jena@Tpan Ku.Jena Vs State of Odisha

Hakim@Harbhajan Singh Vs State of Odisha

Banshidhar Giri Vs Sanat Ku.Das