The High Court allowed an application for interim bail under section 439 Cr.P.C. in a serious criminal case. Considering the lack of direct evidence, long period of detention, and local bar constraints, the petitioner was released for three months.
Petitioners released on interim bail for three months on such terms as the learned court below deems proper.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BLAPL No.188 of 2019
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
This is an application under section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with S.T. Case No.23 of 2018 arising out of Brajarajnagar P.S. Case No.244 of 2017 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Jharsuguda for offences punishable under sections 342/436/307/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The petitioners moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Jharsuguda which was rejected on 17.07.2018.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in judicial custody since 21.10.2017 and they have been charge sheeted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and other offences. It is submitted that the occurrence in question took place on 09.10.2017 and there are no eye witnesses to the occurrence and the deceased Jyotis Ratre @ Satnami died out of burn injuries while undergoing treatment and in his dying declaration, he implicated the petitioner to be responsible for the crime. It is contended that during the daytime some quarrel ensued between the parties relating to taking of water from the tank and while the deceased was sleeping in his house, his house was set on fire and on suspicion, he has implicated the petitioner. It is further submitted that in the meantime, trial has progressed and eleven witnesses have already been examined and at present in the Courts at Jharsuguda, the trial of the cases are not in progress as the local bar
2
members are not cooperating with the trial of the cases and therefore, the petitioners may be granted interim bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners file the deposition copies of the witnesses which are taken on record.
Perused the report of the learned Sessions Judge, Jharsuguda dated 03.04.2019.
Learned counsel for the State has produced the case diary and opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of accusation against the petitioners, absence of any direct evidence, nature of circumstantial evidence available on record, the period of detention of the petitioners in jail custody and taking into account the situation which is prevailing in the Courts at Jharsuguda, I am inclined to release the petitioners on interim bail for a period of three months from the date of release.
Let the petitioners be released on bail in the aforesaid case on interim bail for the aforesaid period on such terms and conditions as learned Court in seisin over the matter may deem just and proper.
The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
sisir
………………….. S. K. Sahoo, J.
3
sisir
4
5
6
7
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are eligible for interim bail pending trial in a serious offence charge-sheeted against them.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
The Petitioners
The State
S. K. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
