The High Court granted bail to the petitioner, who is the wife of the deceased in a murder trial, considering the absence of direct evidence, long period of detention, and slow trial progress.
Petitioner released on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000 with two local solvent sureties.
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.4178 of 2020
1
Sabita Pattnaik @ Sabita … Petitioner Pradhan
-Versus-
State of Odisha
... Opp. party
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with S.T. Case No.21/10 of 2018 arising out of Kisinda P.S. Case No.27 of 2017 pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sambalpur for commission of offences punishable under sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code.
The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sambalpur (I/C) which was rejected on 06.02.2020.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, who is the wife of the deceased Gokula Pradhan, is in judicial custody since 15.07.2017 and she has been charge sheeted under sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code. The occurrence in question took place on 12.07.2017 and there are no eye witnesses to the occurrence and two days after the alleged occurrence, the decomposed body of the
2
deceased was found and though the trial has commenced but only two witnesses have been examined so far in the case and the informant has not supported the prosecution case and P.W.2 Patra Sahoo, who is the neighbour of the petitioner has also not stated anything against the petitioner. He further submitted that in view of the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody and slow progress of the trial, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered. He filed the deposition copies of P.W.1 and P.W.2, which are taken on record.
Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submitted that the weapon of offence was seized at the instance of the petitioner and when the neighbours found some smell coming from a particular place and that place was dug in presence of the petitioner, the decomposed body of the deceased was found. He further submitted that injury was noticed on the ear portion of the deceased and some material witnesses are yet to be examined in the learned trial Court and therefore, the petitioner should not be granted bail.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of accusation against the petitioner, absence of any direct evidence, the nature of evidence adduced so far in the learned trial Court, the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, slow progress of the trial and keeping in view the proviso to section 437(1)
3
of Cr.P.C., 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, J.
RKM
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in a murder case under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sabita Pattnaik @ Sabita Pradhan
State of Odisha
S.K. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
