Partly allowed

Priya Ranjan Swain@ Papi v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC6 Dec 2021ABLAPL/14103/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the petition for anticipatory bail due to lack of reasonable apprehension. However, liberty was granted for future applications if an FIR is registered or if the petitioner faces summons in matrimonial disputes, ensuring strict adherence to legal procedures during interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to approach the court for anticipatory bail if a case is registered pursuant to a complaint by the wife, and liberty granted if summons are issued in matrimonial disputes.

Priya Ranjan Swain@ Papi Vs State of Odisha — Anticipatory Bail | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No.14103 of 2021

¶3

Priya Ranjan Swain @ Papi & Others …. Petitioners

¶4

-versus-

¶5

State of Odisha

¶6

…. Opposite Party

¶7

CORAM: JUSTICE S. PUJAHARI

Order No.

ORDER 06.12.2021

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

¶12

As it appears, without registration of a P.S. Case and without lodging of F.I.R., the Petitioners have approached this Court for their release on pre-arrest bail. No doubt, registration of F.I.R. is not sine-qua-non seeking release on pre-arrest bail, but the apprehension of arrest in any non-bailable offence must be reasonable and substantial one. Submission is made on behalf of the Petitioners that the police is coming to the residence of the petitioners frequently in civil dress to search the petitioner, as such, the apprehension of arrest is there. But, no date and time of such search of the petitioners by the police is mentioned in the bail petition.

¶13

In such premises, notwithstanding the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. vrs. State of Punjab, reported in 1980 AIR 1632 that registration of a

¶14

Page 1 of 2

¶15

// 2 //

¶16

case is not condition precedent to invoke the jurisdiction of 438 of Cr.P.C. when there is reasonable apprehension of their arrest by police in non-bailable offence, I am not inclined to entertain the present petition for pre-arrest bail. However, while disposing of this petition, liberty is given to the Petitioners to approach this Court or the Court of Sessions when there is reasonable apprehension of arrest or any case registered pursuant to the report lodged by the wife of the Petitioner No.1. But, the petitioners if called to the Police Station by the police in connection with any matrimonial dispute between the petitioners and his wife, they shall not be taken to custody without any case being pending against him. So also if any case is registered in the aforesaid facts, they be given notice under Section 160 Cr.P.C well ahead of there being called to police station for interrogation in any non-bailable offence registered at the instance of the wife of the Petitioner No.1 and in that event the Petitioners may approach this Court under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, if so advised.

¶17

With the aforesaid order, this ABLAPL stands disposed of.

¶18

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

¶19

(S. Pujahari) Judge

¶20

SKB/MRS

¶21

Page 2 of 2

Priya Ranjan Swain@ Papi v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priya Ranjan Swain@ Papi 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajalaxmi Mishra Vs State of Orissa

Uma Sahoo Vs State of Orissa

Artatran Jena Vs State of Odisha

Pankaj Behera Vs State of Odisha

Kuna @ Deeptirmaya Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Ashok Kumar Dash @ Ashoka Dash Vs State of Odisha