High Court allowed bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. held that despite prior rejection and maoist connection, petitioner qualifies for bail considering co-accused bail grant, residence, and lack of absconding evidence.
Petitioner released on bail subject to conditions including police reporting and appearance at trial.
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. 1455 of 2021
Abello Gamango …. Petitioner
-Vrs.-
State of Odisha …. Opp. party
Heard Mr.P.K.Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.S.Mohapatra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State through Video Conferencing mode.
This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner-Abello Gamango in connection with Badagada P.S. Case No . 04 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. Case No.06 of 2011 of the court of learned J.M.F.C., Soroda, presently pending before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar in S.T. Case No.08 of 2021., where chargsheet has been filed for commission of offences punishable under Sections -120 (B), 121,121 (A),124(A), 435, 379,143 IPC and Section– 10/13/16/18A/20/39/40 of the UAP Act read with Sec-17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act against the petitioner and others.
The petitioner had moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar which was rejected on 11.02.2021.
Bichi
The prosecution allegations in brief as per the FIR lodged by Sahu a sub contractor Santosh is that on 19.01.2011 is that a work order was allotted in favour of one Girish Chandra Sahu and on 18.1.2011 midnight about 12/13 unknown culprits armed with guns and mausers
2
arrived in the camp at Boroda and drove away the labourers, poured diesel on the Hitachi Tata Machine and two tractors and set them on fire. They also took one Tipper Truck, five mobile handsets and one Hero Honda motorcycle and the driver Madhab Sahu, but left him at a nearby place. FIR was registered against 12-13 unknown persons for offences under Sections- 147/ 148 /435 /379 /366/149 IPC and Section-27 of the Arms Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. When he learnt about this case against him, he alongwith 4 other accused persons (K. Anita Majhi, Kandra Dala Behera, Sudarshan Mandal and Bikram Mallik had approached this Hon’ble Court in ABLAPL No.5444 of 2020 and this Court vide order dated 01.12.2020 was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail but had permitted the petitioner and the co-accused persons to surrender before the learned court in seisin of the case within a period of 15 days and move for bail with a direction that the application would be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by the said order taking into account the factum of grant of bail to the co-accused persons in its proper perspective. As the present petitioner could not surrender within the stipulated time the benefit of the said order was not extended to the petitioner by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar. He further submits that Kandra Dalabehera and Sudarsan Mandal whose prayer for bail had been rejected by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar by the same impugned order, have been granted bail in BLAPL No.3310 of 2021 by this Court.
3
He further submits that the petitioner is not an absconder and while he was facing trial in ST Case No.130 of 2013, 131 of 2013 and 132 of 2013 request had been made by the learned J.M.F.C., Sorada for sparing him for this case, but he was not remanded in the present case. He has been acquitted in those three cases in 2015 and in the other case which is pending against him, his bail application is listed today. The present case, S.T. Case No.08 of 2021 is posted for framing of charge. He also submits that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Village: Ranga Matia, P.S. Badagada in the district of Ganjam, which precludes any reasonable apprehension of his absconding from the process of justice, if he is released on bail.
Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel objects to the prayer for bail stating that the petitioner is a member of a maoist organization and has a number of criminal antecedents has evaded arrest in this case since long and has not surrendered within the time permitted by this Hon’ble Court for which his prayer for bail has been rightly rejected. But he does not dispute the submission that the petitioner stands on the same footing as the two co-accused who have been granted bail in BLAPL No.3310 of 2021.
Considering the respective submissions of the learned counsel, nature of allegations against the petitioner, release of the co-accused on bail and after going through the order passed by the learned court below, I am inclined to allow this application for bail.
Let the petitioner - Abello Gamango be released on
4
bail, on such terms and conditions as the learned trial court may deem fit and proper including the following conditions:
Violation of any conditions will entail in cancellation of bail. The learned court below is directed to expedite the trial.
The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
Copy of this order be communicated to the IIC Badagada Police Station, District-Ganjam.
As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the petitioner may utilize a printout of the order available in the High Court’s website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned advocate, in the manner prescribed vide Court’s Notice No.4587 dated 25th March, 2020 as modified by Court’s Notice No.4798 dated 15th April. 2021.
………………..……..
Savitri Ratho (Judge)
5
6
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. deserves to be allowed despite prior rejection and membership of a maoist organization.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail considering that co-accused have been granted bail in an earlier application.
Whether the petitioner has reasonable apprehension of absconding given his residential status and acquittal in other cases.
4 provisions across 4 enactments
Abello Gamango
State of Odisha
Savitri Ratho
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
