Dismissed

Bapi @ Jayakrushna Behera v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC16 Jul 2021BLAPL/2496/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Orissa heard a fourth bail application of a petitioner in custody for offences under IPC and POCSO Act. The court rejected the bail prayer due to the heinous nature of the charges, conduct of the petitioner, and lack of changed circumstances.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; petitioner granted liberty to approach the Court after framing of charge.

Bapi @ Jayakrushna Behera Vs State of Odisha — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No. 2496 of 2021

¶3

Bapi @ Jayakrushna Behera …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Deepak Kumar Sahoo, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha …. Opposite Party

¶7

Mr. S. S. Pradhan, Additional Government Advocate

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE S. K. PANIGRAHI

ORDER

Order No.

16.07.2021

02. 1 . This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode.

¶14

2. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶15

3. Since the bail prayer of the petitioner has been rejected earlier vide order dated 26.02.2021 in BLAPL No. 595 of 2021 by this Court, the petitioner has preferred this bail application for the fourth time.

¶16

4. Petitioner is in custody in connection with Derabish PS Case No. 93 of 2020 corresponding to GR Case No.35 of 2020, pending in the court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Kendrapara registered for the offence punishable under Sections 457, 294, 506, 354-A, 354-D of IPC and Section 12 of POCSO Act.

¶17

// 2 //

¶18

5. The allegation of the prosecution is that the uncle of the victim lodged an FIR alleging therein that the petitioner twice barged into the house of the informant for which he was arrested on 19.03.2020. Thereafter, the petitioner was released on bail. It was further alleged that after release from custody, the petitioner once again barged into the house of the informant and threatened for dire consequences. The accused asked to withdraw the case otherwise she would suffer. He also tried to outrage the modesty of a minor girl.

¶19

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the investigation has already been progressed and chargesheet has also been submitted. The informant is the uncle of the victim and the petitioner is their neighbor. The petitioner has been entangled in this case due to personal dispute and there is no other material against the petitioner. The petitioner has been in custody since 06.05.2020.

¶20

7 . Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail application of the petitioner. He further submits that it appears from the case record that the petitioner touched the private parts of the victim girl. The statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC makes a serious allegation against the petitioner. The petitioner has committed such offences even after his release on bail.

¶21

8 . Considering the facts and submissions made, especially the nature and gravity of accusation, conduct of the petitioner, character of supportive

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

// 3 //

¶24

materials appearing against the petitioner, circumstances, in which the offence alleged to have been committed and heinousness and seriousness of the offence alleged more particularly without having any changed circumstances, this Court is of the view that the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail. Hence, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

¶25

9. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of being dismissed.

¶26

10. The petitioner is accordingly granted liberty to approach this Court after framing of charge.

¶27

11. As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties 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.4798, dated 15^th April, 2021.

¶28

(S. K. Panigrahi) Judge

¶29

AKP

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Bapi @ Jayakrushna Behera v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bapi @ Jayakrushna Behera 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sipun Majhi Vs State of Odisha

Kanha @ Priya Ranjan Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Kartika Chhatria Vs State of Odisha

Rudra Prasad Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Dayalu Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Deba Kumar Naik @ Deba Vs State of Odisha