Dismissed

Kiran Das@Kalia v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC19 Apr 2019BLAPL/1151/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application for anticipatory bail and bail under Section 439 CrPC in murder and arms offences, the High Court dismissed the application citing the manner of the ghastly crime, post-mortem findings, and strong prima facie case. The Court alternatively directed the trial court to expedite the trial to mitigate prolonged detention.

What did the court decide?

The application for bail is dismissed; the trial court is directed to expedite the trial.

Kiran Das@Kalia Vs State of Orissa — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2019)

¶1

BLAPL No. 1151 of 2018

¶2

19.04.2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

¶3

This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with S.T. Case No.8/224 of 2017 arising out of Balasore Town P.S. Case No.64 of 2017 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Balasore for alleged commission of offences punishable under sections 302/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.

¶4

The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Balasore which was rejected on 20.01.2018.

¶5

It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 14.07.2017 and charge sheet has been submitted under sections 302/307 of the Indian Penal Code and other offences and the trial of the case has commenced and twelve witnesses have already been examined in the trial Court. He further submitted that in the dying declaration, the deceased Jayanta Das has not implicated the petitioner and he implicated one Kalia along with other co-accused persons and Kalia is the nick name of another co-accused i.e. Kalia Das whose father’s name is Bhagirathi Das. Another witness namely Satya Ranjan Das (P.W.7) who has stated about the dying declaration has also not implicated the petitioner and therefore, the bail application may be favourably considered.

¶6

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand placed the evidence of P.W.6 and P.W.7 who are the two eye witnesses to the occurrence P.W.6 has implicated Kalia along with other co-accused persons to have assaulted the deceased

¶7

¶8

Jayanta. Similarly P.W.7 has implicated Kalia @ Kiran along with others to be the assailants of the deceased. It appears that the deceased has sustained as many as thirty four injuries on different parts of the body and if there are any discrepancies or any omission relating to the name of any accused, the same is to be adjudicated by the trial Court.

¶9

Learned counsel for the informant also vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the respective parties, the manner in which the ghastly crime has been committed and the materials available on record against the petitioner and particularly the post mortem report findings, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

¶11

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands dismissed.

¶12

skb

¶13

However, taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, I direct the learned trial Court to expedite the trial.

¶14

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial Court.

¶15

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

¶16

………………….. S. K. Sahoo, J.

¶17

¶18

Kiran Das@Kalia v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kiran Das@Kalia 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

Sabitarani Nayak Vs State

Raju Gouda Vs State of Orissa

Prasanna Kumar Das Vs State of Odisha

Braja Kishore Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Ajay Kumar Prasad Vs State of Odisha

Papina@Bikash Mallick Vs State of Orissa