Allowed

Chandan Nayak v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC12 Apr 2019BLAPL/1448/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the High Court observed that besides a co-accused's confessional statement, there is no other material against the petitioner. Considering the release of co-accused and detention period, the court granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 with two solvent sureties each for the like amount.

Chandan Nayak Vs State of Odisha — Corruption | Orissa HC (2019)

¶1

BLAPL No. 1448 of 2019

¶2

12.04.2019

¶3

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

¶4

This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with G.R. Case No.1973 of 2018 arising out of Raghunathpalli P.S. Case No.322 of 2018 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Rourkela for alleged commission of offences punishable under sections 457/394/120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.

¶5

The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of learned 1^st Addl. Sessions Judge, Rourkela which was rejected on 15.01.2019.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 12.12.2018 and charge sheet has been submitted under sections 457/394/120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act and similarly situated the coaccused persons have already been released on bail by this Court in BLAPL No.1171 of 2019 vide order dated 29.03.2019, copy of which is filed and taken on record. He further submitted that except the confessional statement of co-accused, there is no other material against the petitioner and therefore, the bail application may be favourably considered.

¶7

Learned counsel for the State was directed to obtain instruction as to whether the investigating agency is purposing make a prayer before the Magistrate for holding the T.I. parade or not. Today learned counsel for the State

¶8

¶9

submitted that there is no such proposal and he fairly submits that except the confessional statement of the coaccused, there is no other material against the petitioner.

¶10

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of accusation against the petitioner and release of the co-accused on bail as well as taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

¶11

skb

¶12

Let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000.00 (rupees twenty thousand) 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

¶17

Chandan Nayak v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandan Nayak 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

Deenabandhu Adhikari Vs State of Orissavig.

Chandra Sekhar Mishr Vs State of Odisha

Amiya Kumar Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Kunja Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Rohita Tandan Vs State of Odisha

Susil Sahoo@Kakar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha