Allowed

Jyostnarani Jena v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC15 Dec 2021ABLAPL/4771/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted a stay on costs imposed for failure to produce a case diary, directing a police inquiry into communication delays. It subsequently directed the release of petitioners on bail upon arrest, subject to cooperating with the investigation and no new charges arising.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail if arrested, subject to cooperating with investigation and no other graver offences reported; costs on Inspector-in-Charge put on hold pending inquiry report.

Jyostnarani Jena Vs State of Odisha — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No.4771 of 2020

¶3

Jyostnarani Jena & another

¶4

…. Petitioners

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opposite Party

¶8

CORAM: THE JUSTICE S.PUJAHARI

ORDER

Order No.

15.12.2021

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

¶14

2. The Petitioners apprehending their arrest in Jodapadar P.S. Case No.04 of 2020 registered for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 406/506/34 IPC have filed this petition for their release on pre-arrest bail.

¶15

3. As it appears, this ABLAPL is of the year 2020, which was taken up on 14.05.2020. Thereafter, on 02.08.2021 the Case Diary was called for from the concerned Police Station but the Case Diary was not produced on the next date i.e.16.09.2021 in spite of the communications from the Office of the Advocate General. Hence this Court had no option than to ask the I.O to cause production of the Case Diary and impose a cost of Rs.50,000/- to be deposited in the Puri Legal Services Authority by the next date. However, on the next date i.e. 09.11.2021 two applications were taken up i.e. I.A Nos.1273 and 1283 of 2021, though I.A No.1283 of 2021 is a xerox copy

¶16

Page 1 of 5

¶17

// 2 //

¶18

of I.A No.1273 of 2021. On hearing the learned counsel for the State, this Court has passed the order, as follows:

¶19

Both the interim applications have been filed by the Inspector-in-Charge, Jodapadar (Godisagada) Police Station to recall the order dated 16^th September, 2021 passed by this Court in the aforesaid bail application on the ground that Wireless Messaged dated 3^rd August, 2021 sent by the office of the Advocate General, Odisha was not received by him, as the police station functions in the name and address of Jodapadar Police Station, Jodapadar, but in reality, the same has been functioning at Godisagada, which is about 18 Kms. from the Village-Jodapadar.

¶20

Heard.

¶21

List this matter on 15^th December, 2021.

¶22

In the meanwhile, an inquiry be conducted whether the message was sent by the Nodal Officer or not and if not sent, why the same was not reported to the office of the Advocate General that such police station is not there. Such report must be submitted by the next date, failing which, necessary steps shall be taken against the Nodal Officer concerned.

¶23

Superintendent of Police concerned also directed to make an inquiry in this regard and submit the report by the next date.

¶24

A free copy of this order be given to the concerned counsel for the State to do the needful by communicating this order to the Superintendent of Police and Nodal Officer concerned.”

¶25

4. Today the Superintendent of Police has furnished a report indicting therein that the VHF message No.4120 dated

¶26

// 3 //

¶27

03.08.2020 from the office of Advocate General, Odisha, Cuttack in ABLAPL No.4771 of 2020 filed by the Petitioners has been received in the office of DIB, Puri on 04.08.2021 and was immediately dispatched to the VHF Control room on 04.08.2021 at 6.05 P.M. On the same day i.e. 04.08.2021 the message has been communicated to IIC, Gadishagoda P.S. (T) VHF & Whatsapp. Since the IIC, Jodapadar was engaged in L/O duty in connection with Pipili by-election and the concerned staff of VHF control room reportedly deleted the message from the chat box on the very next date after communication, the message could not be opened and read by IIC for which the records and CDs could not be submitted in time.

¶28

5. If that be so, why he has not mentioned the Whatsapp number to whom it was communicated and how VHP could have been deleted and it was not communicated to the Inspector-in-charge concerned. Since the lapses is serious one, the Superintendent of Police concerned is directed to take the person concerned to task, proceed against him and furnish a report for such dereliction of duty and intimate the action taken report to the Court by the next date. Till then the cost imposed on the I.O pursuant to the order dated 16.09.2021 for his dereliction of duty is put on hold as it is stated that he having not received the message and also being busy in the election duty, the Case Diary in the aforesaid case on the date fixed could not be produced.

¶29

// 4 //

¶30

6. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned counsel for the State.

¶31

7. The case diary is available.

¶32

8. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners are innocent persons as such they be released on pre-arrest bail.

¶33

9. Learned counsel for the State, after going the materials collected during investigation, submits that though the Petitioners misappropriated the NREGA money from the Bank by mis-utilizing the job card of the complainants but no complaint was made to the Bank Manager at any point of time. The Petitioners have no criminal antecedent. Investigation has substantially progressed. Release of the Petitioners shall have no adverse impact on a free and fair investigation and they shall abscond, if released on pre-arrest bail.

¶34

10. On consideration of the aforesaid facts and also the submissions made, especially the nature and character of allegations, circumstances in which the offences stated to have been committed and also it being not disputed that the Petitioners’ release on pre-arrest bail shall not be an hindrance to a free and fair investigation, this Court directs that in the event of arrest of the Petitioners in connection with the aforesaid case, they be released on bail by the Officer effecting arrest on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper 11. However, the aforesaid order is subject to the condition that the Petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation and no

¶35

// 5 //

¶36

other graver offence is reported against the Petitioners besides the aforesaid offences.

¶37

12. The ABLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of being allowed.

¶38

13. However, the matter be placed before this Bench on 12.01.2022 with the report of the concerned Superintendent of Police as a disposed of case.

¶39

14. Free copy of this order be handed over to the learned counsel for the State for Compliance.

¶40

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

¶41

application.

¶42

(S. Pujahari) Judge

¶43

PKS

Jyostnarani Jena v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jyostnarani Jena 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

Chandan Malik Vs State of Odisha

Guruprasad Karna Vs State of Odisha

Nimain Rout @ Tulu Vs State of Odisha

Santilata Swain Vs State of Odisha

Ashutosh Biswal Vs State of Odisha

Niyamatun Bibi Vs State of Odisha