In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the court allowed the petitioner's release after observing that key eye witnesses had not supported the prosecution case during the trial.
Petitioner released on bail on bond of Rs.20,000/- with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount.
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.4820 of 2020
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
This is an application under Section 439, Cr.P.C. in connection with S.T.Case No.18 of 2019 arising out of Sheragada P.S. Case No.32 of 2018 pending in the court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aska for commission of offences punishable under Sections 302/120-B/212/34 of the I.P.C. read with Sections 25 (1a)(b)/27 of the Arms Act.
The petitioner moved an application for bail before the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aska which was rejected on 05.06.2020.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 09.10.2018 and his last bail application in BLAPL No.1214 of 2019 was rejected on 30.07.2019 mainly relying on the statement of eye witness Jagannath Swain. He further submits that in the meantime, trial has been commenced and the said Jagannath Swain has been examined as P.W.9 and he has not supported the prosecution case and another eye witness namely, Muna Swain has also been examined as P.W.10 and he has not supported the prosecution case. In support of such submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has annexed the deposition copies to the
R
2
connected bail application. He therefore, submits that in view of the change in circumstances, the petitioner’s bail application may be favourably considered.
Learned counsel for the State after going through the deposition copies of the witnesses fairly submits that the eye witnesses have not supported the prosecution case during trial.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of evidence appearing against the petitioner and the fact that the eye witnesses have not supported the prosecution case during trial and further taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, I am inclined to consider the prayer for bail and direct the petitioner to be released on bail.
Let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in session over the matter with further terms and conditions as the learned court may deem just and proper.
Accordingly, the BLAPL is disposed of.
…………..…..…..
P. Patnaik, J.
3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail on the ground of changed circumstances in the trial evidence?
3 provisions across 3 enactments
The Petitioner
The State
P. Patnaik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
