Partly allowed

Tahasil Karuan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC23 Nov 2020BLAPL/2091/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 439 Cr.P.C. application regarding murder offenses, the court granted bail to petitioner no. 1 with two sureties due to age and lack of specific overt acts, but rejected the application for petitioner no. 2 based on a confession and recovery of weapons.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner no. 1 released on bail Rs. 50,000 with two sureties; Petitioner no. 2 bail application rejected.

Tahasil Karuan Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

BLAPL No. 2091 of 2020

¶2

1. Tahasil Karuan

¶3

2. Amarsingh Karuan ……. Petitioners

¶4

-Vrs.-

¶5

State of Odisha ……. Opp. Party

¶6

23.11.2020 This matter is taken up through Video Conferencing.

¶7

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

¶8

This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with S.C. Case No.06 of 2020 arising out of Belpada P.S. Case No.146 of 2019 pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Patnagarh for offences punishable under sections 341/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶9

The petitioners moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Patnagarh which was rejected on 19.02.2020.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in judicial custody since 08.09.2019 and they have been charge sheeted under sections 341/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. He further submits that the occurrence in question took place on 05.09.2019 and as per the eye witness account of Budu Ram, the deceased Sridhar Karuan was assaulted by five accused persons including the petitioners. He further submitted that the post mortem report indicates that there is an injury on the head as well as on both the legs and one iron rod was recovered at the instance of the petitioner

¶11

no.2 and one Medha was recovered at the instance of the petitioner no.1 on the basis of their statements recorded under section 27 of the Evidence Act and as per the post mortem report, the cause of death of the deceased was on account of brain hemorrhage and the petitioner no.2 stated to have assaulted on the head of the deceased by means of an iron rod and the eye witness has not attributed any specific overt act against any of the accused persons and therefore, the bail application of the petitioners particularly that of petitioner no.1 who is aged about sixty seven years may be favourably considered.

¶12

Learned counsel for the State produced the case diary and placed the statement of Biswanath Karuan who stated about the extra judicial confession made by petitioner no.2 Amarsingh Karuan.

¶13

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of accusation against petitioner no.2 namely, Amarsingh Karuan, his extra judicial confession and the recovery of the weapon of offence and the post mortem report findings, I am not inclined to release him on bail. Accordingly, the bail application of petitioner no.2 Amarsingh Karuan stands rejected.

¶14

So far as petitioner no.1 namely, Tahasil Karuan is concerned, taking into account his age, in absence of any specific overt act against him and further taking into account his period of detention in judicial custody, I am inclined to release him on bail.

¶15

Let the petitioner no.1 namely, Tahasil Karuan be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000.00(rupees fifty thousand) with two local 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.

¶16

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶17

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

¶18

…………………..……

¶19

S.K. Sahoo, J.

¶20

Tahasil Karuan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tahasil Karuan 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

Md.Jasim Vs State of Odisha

Jitu @ Jitendra Behera Vs State of Odisha

Indra @ Indramani Naik Vs State of Odisha

Gouranga Roul Vs State of Odisha

Soumya Ranjan Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Mila @ Milan Naik @ Milan Kumar Naik Vs State of Odisha