The High Court of Orissa dismissed a petition for pre-arrest bail filed by Madan Takri accused under POCSO and IPC sections. The court held that given the heinousness of the offence and the minor status of the victim, no case for release exists.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
ABLAPL No.2675 of 2021
Madan Takri … Petitioner
-versus –
State of Odisha … Opp. Party
CORAM : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. PUJAHARI
ORDER
This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner apprehending his arrest in Chitrakonda P.S. Case No.70 of 2019 corresponding to T.R. Case No.16 of 2019 pending in the court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Malkangiri for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 323/376(3)/511/506 IPC read with Section 8 of the POCSO Act has filed this petition for his release on pre-arrest bail.
The petitioner had earlier approached this Court in ABLAPL No.14514 of 2019, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 5.11.2019. The petitioner has again approached this Court for pre-arrest bail in this petition.
The prosecution allegation reveals that on 12.05.2019 at about 7 P.M the victim, who is a 15 years girl, along with her friend had been to a feast of the village and while she was returning from there along with her friend, at about 8 P.M near Anganwadi centre, the petitioner appeared and pulled her hand to take her with him and seeing them when her friend made
2
protest, petitioner extended threat to her and made an attempt to take the victim to a lonely and dark place. Seeing the same when one of the villagers, namely, Prafulla Nanda made protest to the petitioner, the petitioner assaulted him and dragged the victim towards jungle, which is about 1 K.M away from that place and also made an attempt to rape her. However, victim could escape from his clutch. It is also alleged that the petitioner had then extended threat to kill her.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the allegations made are false and concocted one as has been made on an instinct of self-preservation as such petitioner deserves to be released on pre-arrest bail more particularly when he is of tender age.
However, learned counsel for the State would made objection to such prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner considering the nature of accusation, so also heinousness and seriousness of the offence alleged.
On consideration of the facts and the submissions made, especially the nature of accusation, character of incriminating materials appearing against the petitioner, heinousness and seriousness of the offence alleged, circumstances in which the petitioner has been indicted in this case and instinct of self-preservation and no application to the case as the victim was a minor, I am of the view that petitioner has no case for his release on pre-arrest bail.
Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands dismissed.
3
As the restrictions due to the COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s website or print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed, vide Court’s Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020.
………. ………….. S.Pujahari, J.
PKS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail given the nature of the serious offence alleged against him.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Madan Takri
State of Odisha
S. PUJARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
