Dismissed

Bibhu @ Pratap Sahu v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC25 Feb 2021BLAPL/6250/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner in custody sought bail in an S.T. Case involving IPC offences. Court rejected bail due to criminal antecedents and incomplete prosecution case. State directed to produce remaining witnesses within three months; petitioner allowed to renew bail prayer thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Bail prayed rejected. State directed to produce material witnesses within three months.

Bibhu @ Pratap Sahu Vs State of Orissa — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

CORAM : Hon’ble Shri Justice S. Pujahari

¶2

BLAPL No.6250 of 2020

¶3

Bibhu @ Pratap Sahu … Petitioner

¶4

versus –

¶5

9. 25.02.2021

¶6

ORDER

¶7

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

¶8

The petitioner being in custody in S.T Case No.16/394 of 2019 arising out of Patkura P.S Case No.51 of 2017 pending in the court of learned C.J.M.cum-Asst. Sessions Judge, Kendrapara has filed this petition for his release on bail. The offence alleged against him is punishable under Sections 294/ 506/ 507/ 385/ 395/ 435/ 307 IPC.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no doubt the prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court but in the meanwhile most of the material witnesses have been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution. The coaccused persons have already been released on bail. The petitioner is in custody for more than three years and as such the petitioner be released on bail, submits

¶10

¶11

the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶12

Learned counsel for the State submits that three more material witnesses are there who are yet to be examined. The witnesses examined in this case have turned hostile. In such premises, the release of the petitioner who is the principal accused would impact a fair trial and as such the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail, submits the learned counsel for the State.

¶13

On consideration of the facts and the submissions made, especially the criminal antecedents of the petitioner as well as the material witnesses are yet to be examined and this Court earlier rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

¶14

However, the State is directed to cause production of the material witnesses in this case before the trial court within three months hence. If the State fails to produce the material witnesses within three months, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the trial court and in that event, the trial court shall, without being influenced by this order of rejection of this Court, consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner taking note of inaction of the prosecution to produce the material witnesses as well as the period

¶15

¶16

of incarceration.

¶17

This order be communicated to the trial court

¶18

immediately.

¶19

The BLAPL stands disposed of.

¶20

……..………..… S.Pujahari, J.

¶21

PKS

Bibhu @ Pratap Sahu v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bibhu @ Pratap Sahu v. State of Orissa

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

Gabrial Haro Vs State of Odisha

Ananda Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Adhikari Fakiramohan Das Vs State of Odisha

Urban Co-Op.Bank Ltd. Vs C.M.C.

Akhaya Ku.Nayak Vs State

Harekrushna Panda Vs State and Ors.