Allowed

Papu @ Prasanta Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC16 Sept 2021BLAPL/3802/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., releasing him after considering identification discrepancies, long detention, and similarity to the case of a released co-accused. Bail was granted subject to specific conditions including regular reporting and appearance.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with conditions to appear regularly, not commit further offences, and report to IIC Jagatsinghpur every Monday for one year.

Papu @ Prasanta Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL NO.3802 OF 2020

¶3

Papu @ Prasanta Pradhan

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Puspamitra Mohapatra, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha

¶8

…. Opposite Party Ms. Samapika Mishra, ASC

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

MR. JUSTICE D.DASH

ORDER

Order No.

16.09.2021

This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement (virtual/physical) mode.

¶16

This is the second journey of this Petitioner who is in custody connection with in connection with Jagatsinghpur P.S. Case No.311 of 2017 corresponding to C.T. Case No.46 of 2019 on the file of learned Asst. Sessions Judge-cum-CJM, Jagatsinghpur running for alleged commission of offence under Section-457/395 of the IPC read with Section-25/27 of the Arms Act, in filing this application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for her release on bail.

¶17

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner being arrested in the case is in custody since 25.01.2018. He further submits that though the Petitioner has been identified by the victim in the T.I. parade held in course of investigation, in the trial, the victim has stated to have so identified having earlier seen the photograph given in the local newspaper. He, therefore, submits that such evidence of identification is per se not acceptable. He also submits that in the

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

meantime, the co-accused Susanta Sahoo who of course has not been identified in the trial despite identification in the T.I. parade has been released on bail by order passed by this Court in BLAPL No.7565 of 2019. It is further submitted that despite long detention of the Petitioner in the custody, the trial has yet not reached the mid way and its conclusion is not expected so soon. He, therefore, he urges for grant of bail to the Petitioner as according to him further detention of the Petitioner in custody would serve no useful purpose, when also there remains no scope on the part of the Petitioner to flee from justice and tamper the evidence.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State opposes the move. According to her, it is too premature a stage to take any view with regard to the acceptance of the evidence of identification of the Petitioner in Court.

¶22

Taking into account the submissions made; further keeping in view the materials on records as also other surrounding circumstances including the period of detention of the Petitioner in custody and on going through the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, in the absence of any such impediment; while being inclined to reconsider the prayer for grant of bail to the Petitioner, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the Court in seisin of the case with further conditions that:-

¶23

he will appear in person before the Court in seisin of the case on each date of posting of the case without fail;

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

// 3 //

¶26

will not indulge herself in commission of similar type of offence; and

¶27

will report before the IIC, Jagatsinghpur P.S. every Monday in between 10 am to 2.00 for a period of next one year.

¶28

Violation of any of the condition/s shall entail cancellation of bail.

¶29

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶30

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶31

(D. Dash), Judge.

¶32

Narayan

¶33

Page 3 of 3

Papu @ Prasanta Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Papu @ Prasanta Pradhan 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

Kata Dipu @ Silpataru Swain Vs State of Orissa

Parameswar Mohanta @ Parameshwar Mohanta Vs State of Odisha

Pabitra Khatei Vs State of Odisha

Batakrushna Sahoo Vs Mamata Sahoo

Mantu Kisku Vs State of Odisha

Rajesh Kumar Senapati Vs State of Odisha