Allowed

Kirtan Behera v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC6 Mar 2019BLAPL/10/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under section 439 Cr.P.C. concerning a murder case, the High Court considered the nature of evidence, the period of detention, and the delay by the sole eye witness. The Court was inclined to release the petitioners on bail subject to furnishing a bond and sureties with appropriate undertakings.

What did the court decide?

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

Kirtan Behera Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2019)

¶1

BLAPL No.10 of 2019

¶2

06.03.2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State.

¶3

This is an application under section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with C.T.(S) Case No.107 of 2017 arising out of Kaniha P.S. Case No.106 of 2017 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Talcher for offences punishable under sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶4

The petitioners moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Talcher which was rejected on 26.12.2018.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody since 26.07.2017 and they have been charge sheeted under sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is further submitted that the occurrence in question took place on 23.06.2017 and the F.I.R. was lodged on the next day and the sole eye witnesses to the occurrence is one Salkhan Majhi and he was examined by the police one month after the occurrence and he has stated in his examination–in-chief that he did not know the deceased Golekha Majhi but stated that he has seen the petitioners assaulting the deceased on the date of occurrence. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that other witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and therefore, the bail application of the petitioners may be favourably considered.

¶6

¶7

Perused the statements of the witnesses examined so far in the learned trial Court.

¶8

Learned counsel for the State has produced the case

¶9

¶10

diary and placed the statement of Delha Hembram.

¶11

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the respective parties, the nature of evidence available on record, the period of detention of the petitioners in judicial custody and taking into account the delay in disclosure of the occurrence by the eye witness Salkhan Majhi (P.W.11), I am inclined to release the petitioners on bail.

¶12

Let the petitioners be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000.00 (rupees twenty thousand) each 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 the learned Court may deem just and proper.

¶13

Accordingly, the BLAPL is disposed of.

¶14

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

¶15

………………….. S. K. Sahoo, J.

¶16

Kirtan Behera v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kirtan Behera 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

Ajambar Kairi Vs State of Orissa

Umesh Majhi Vs State of Orissa

Rabin Kishan@Sukra Vs State of Orissa

N.Debakumari Vs State of Odisha

Gobinda Khilla Vs State of Odisha

Ananta Kumar Rout Vs State of Odisha