The High Court of Odisha heard a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. regarding murder charges. Considering the hostility of the main witness, lack of corroboration, and release of co-accused, the Court favored granting bail.
Petitioner released on bail on bond of Rs. 50,000 with two local solvent sureties for like amounts.
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 AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.1376 of 2021
Debu Mandal
…. Petitioner
Mr. C.L. Ray, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha …. Opp. Party
Mr. S.S. Pradhan, Addl. Government Advocate
Mr. Ashok Kumar Sahoo,
Advocate (Informant)
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 06.08.2021
03. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
Arrangement (Video Conferencing/Physical Mode). Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned counsel for the State.
This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with S.T. Case No.05 of 2021 arising out of Jamboo Marine P.S. Case No.82 of 2020 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Kendrapara for offences punishable under sections 302/120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The petitioner moved an application for bail before
// 2 //
the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Kendrapara which was rejected on 10.02.2021.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 03.08.2020 and charge sheet has been submitted under sections 302/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and in the meantime, trial has commenced and there is no eye witness to the occurrence and the case is based on circumstantial evidence and in the trial Court, out of six witnesses examined so far, P.W.1 is the informant and he has not supported the prosecution case, though P.W.2 has implicated the petitioner in his 161 Cr.P.C. statement to have seen the petitioner along with other co-accused persons carrying the deceased but being examined as P.W.2, he has not stated anything against the petitioner for which he has also been declared hostile. He further submitted that some of the co-accused persons have already been released on bail by the learned trial Court and therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered. He has produced the certified copies of the depositions of the witnesses, which are taken on record.
Learned counsel for the State after going through the deposition copies fairly submits that the main witness of the prosecution is P.W.2 and he has not supported the prosecution case.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of evidence adduced so far in the trial Court and the period of
Page 2 of 3
// 3 //
detention of the petitioner in judicial custody and release of co-accused persons on bail, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
Let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/(rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin over the matter with further conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper.
The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
Jagabandhu
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted bail in a murder case based on circumstantial evidence where the main witness is hostile.
Whether the release of co-accused persons on bail and the testimony of the solitary eye-witness should influence the bail decision.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Debu Mandal
State of Odisha
S.K. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
