Allowed

Ajay Kumar Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC5 Apr 2019BLAPL/548/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge order grants bail to petitioners in a criminal trial pending before the 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Puri. The court relied on the commencing of trial, lack of corroboration by key witnesses, and the detention period to reconsider a previously rejected bail plea.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners to be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.20,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for the like amount.

Ajay Kumar Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2019)

¶1

BLAPL No. 548 of 2019

¶2

06. 05.04.2019

¶3

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

¶4

This is an application under Section 439, Cr.P.C. in connection with Puri Sadar P.S. Case No. 300 of 2015 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 10/104 of 2016 pending in the file of learned 2^nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Puri for alleged commission of offences under sections 341, 302, 120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act.

¶5

It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are in judicial custody since 04.10.2015 and the earlier bail application of the petitioners was rejected in BLAPL No.2894 of 2016 as per order dated 04.07.2016 relying on the eye witness account of Brajakishore Swain and the extra judicial confession made before Faguram Pradhan. It is further stated that, in the meantime, trial has commenced and Faguram Pradhan has been examined as P.W.6, who has not supported the prosecution case and though one Harsha Pradhan has been examined as P.W.9 and stated as if he is an eye witness of the occurrence but his 161 Cr.P.C. statement is something different and out of total number of twenty two charge sheeted witnesses, fifteen witnesses have been examined as far in the trial Court and there is no chance of tampering with the evidence and therefore, taking into account the period of detention in judicial custody, the bail application of the petitioners may be favourably considered. Learned counsel for the petitioners has supplied the deposition copies of the witnesses to the learned counsel for the State, who placed the statement of Harsha Pradhan as well as Faguram Pradhan.

¶6

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of evidence available on

¶7

record, the period of detention of the petitioners in judicial custody and the subsequent development after the rejection of the earlier bail application, I am inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail and direct the petitioners to be released on bail.

¶8

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

¶9

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶10

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

¶11

RKM

¶12

…………………..…… S.K.Sahoo,J.

Ajay Kumar Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar Pradhan 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

Smt.Narmada Behera Vs Susanta Ku.Behera

Murali Ghadai Vs Banita Ghadai

Rabindra Nath Patra Vs State

Suru Khadia Vs State of Odisha

Chand Kureshi Vs State of Odisha

Prasanta Kumar Nayak Vs State of Orissa