The High Court of Orissa allowed a bail application filed by Sunil Kumar Sahu, who was in custody in a dacoity case. The court directed his release on stringent terms and conditions after hearing counsel for both parties.
Petitioner to be released on bail with conditions to appear in court, not threaten informant, and not tamper with evidence.
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 . 3112 of 2021
Sunil Kumar Sahu
…. Petitioner
Mr. Suryakanta Dwibedi, Advocate -versus-
State of Odisha
…. Opposite Party
Mr. D. R. Parida, Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM: JUSTICE S. K. PANIGRAHI
Order No. ORDER
08.07.2021
03 . 1 . This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode.
2 . Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
3. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Khaprakhol PS Case No. 23 of 2021 corresponding to GR Case No. 72 of 2021, pending in the court of learned SDJM, Patnagarh, registered for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 450 & 395 of the IPC, Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, Section 9(B) of the Explosive Act and Sections 3 & 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, has filed this application under Section 439 of CrPC for his release on bail.
4. The brief fact of the case is that the informant lodged an FIR alleging that on 22.01.2021, at about 1:00 AM in the night, about 15 to 20 dacoits, who had covered their faces and were armed with deadly weapons, entered the house of the informant by hurling bombs and tearing the door down. They assaulted and terrorized the entire family to loot gold ornaments weighing more than 15 bhari , silver ornaments, cash amounting to �6 lakh, 4 mobile handsets etc. from
// 2 //
their house. The dacoits also damaged the CCTV camera installed in the house of the informant and fled along with the looted articles. Meanwhile, they bombarded the village premises to keep the villagers at bay.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is blameless. He has been entangled in this case only on the basis of the confessional statement of the coaccused. Besides that, there exists no substantial evidence to implicate the petitioner in the alleged offences. The petitioner does not have criminal antecedents. The petitioner has been in custody since 07.02.2021.
6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the petitioner.
7. Considering the submissions made, facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case with some stringent terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the learned court in seisin over the matter with conditions that:-
8. Violation of any of the conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail.
9. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
10. 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
Page 2 of 3
// 3 //
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 15th April, 2021.
(S. K. Panigrahi)
Judge
SP/AKP
Page 3 of 3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to release on bail in a dacoity case involving serious offences where there are no substantial evidences against him except testimonies of co-accused.
5 provisions across 5 enactments
Sunil Kumar Sahu
State of Odisha
S. K. Panigrahi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
