Allowed

Jitu @ Soumya Ranjan Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC14 Sept 2020BLAPL/3199/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Odisha, Bench of S.K. Sahoo J., dismissed objections from the State and granted bail to the petitioner in a POCSO case pending in the Special Court, Dhenkanal, noting non-objection from the victim and informant.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the petitioner on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000 with two solvent sureties each for the like amount.

Jitu @ Soumya Ranjan Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

BLAPL No. 3199 of 2020

¶2

Jitu @ Soumya Ranjan Pradhan ……. Petitioner -Vrs.- State of Odisha ……. Opp. Party

¶3

06. 14.09.2020

¶4

This matter is taken up through Video Conferencing.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant.

¶6

This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with C.T. (Special) POCSO Case No.21 of 2014 arising out of Dhenkanal Sadar P.S. Case No.382 of 2014 pending in the Court of learned Judge, Special Court (POCSO), Dhenkanal under sections 376(2)(n)/417/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 66-E, 67-A of the I.T. Act, section 6 of the POCSO Act and section 6 of Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act .

¶7

The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Dhenkanal which was rejected on 07.05.2020.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 29.04.2020 and he has been charge sheeted under sections 376(2)(n)/417/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 66-E, 67-A of the I.T. Act, section 6 of the POCSO Act and section 6 of Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act. He further submitted that there is no

¶9

chance of his absconding and therefore, the bail application may be favourably considered.

¶10

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submitted that the occurrence in question took place on 25.11.2014 and he placed the 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim.

¶11

The learned counsel for the informant placed the affidavit of the informant as well as the victim in which the victim has stated her age to be 26 years and both of them have stated in the affidavit that they have no objection if the petitioner is enlarged on bail.

¶12

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of accusation against the petitioner, 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim and the affidavits of the informant as well as the victim and the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

¶13

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.

¶14

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶15

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

¶16

…………………..……

¶17

S.K. Sahoo, J.

¶18

Jitu @ Soumya Ranjan Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitu @ Soumya Ranjan 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

The Manager(T.P Cell) M/S New India ASSURANC3E Co.Ltd Vs Kastrui Mallik

Narayan Nayak Vs Sheo Ku.Singh

Divisional Managedr, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Subhashree Sahu

Chandan Panda Vs State of Odisha

Kuna Samal Vs State of Odisha

Pintu Jena Vs State of Odisha