In a bail application for murder and culpable homicide, the Court held that absent changing circumstances, it would not revisit the refusal. However, the trial court was directed to expedite the proceedings.
Bail refused; trial court directed to expedite the trial.
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.6743 OF 2020
The matter is taken up through video conference mode.
This is the 4th journey of the petitioner in filing this application under section 439 Cr.P.C. for his release on bail, who is in custody in connection with Nabarangpur P.S. Case No.322 of 2017 corresponding to C.T. Case No.41 of 2018 pending on the file of learned Court of Sessions Judge, Nuapada running for alleged commission of offence under section 450/302/34 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner being arrested in the above-noted case is in custody since 6.2.2017. He further submits that co-accused persons, namely, Rakesh Bhatra, Shaik Sitab and Saikh Samim have already been gratned bail and there remains no allegation against them that they have abused the liberty. He further submits that although it is alleged that this petitioner with accused Shaik Nazim had inflicted injuries upon the deceased by means of sword, yet they have not stated as to who caused which of such injuries and on which part of the body of the deceased. In view of all these above, when there remains no scope on the part of the petitioner to flee from justice or tamper the evidence, he urges for grant of bail to the petitioner as according to him, his further detention in custody would serve no useful purpose.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the move. It is submitted that the trial of the case has commenced and in the meantime although ten witnesses have been examined, the material witnesses are yet to be. He further submits that examination of the last witness in the trial having taken up on
// 2 //
20th February, 2020, for the spreading of Pandemic Covid-19, there has been no further progress and now since things are gradually improving; the trial is likely to resume soon. Placing the role of those co-accused persons released on bail as also the present petitioner as emanate from the materials on record; he submits that those co-accused persons are not similarly situated with this petitioner.
Keeping in view the submission made; the materials on record being perused, it is seen that the petitioner is one among the two who had assaulted the deceased by means of sword when the deceased was interacting with accused Shaik Samim. Although ten witnesses have been examined in the trial, yet other important witnesses are yet to come to the witness box.
Considering the submissions made; further keeping in view the nature of accusations against the petitioner especially as to the role as those emanate from the materials on record and in absence of any such changing circumstances; this Court is not inclined to reconsider the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
However, keeping in view the period of detention of the petitioner in custody, the trial court is directed to take all such effective steps as provided in law for early conclusion of the trial in accordance with law.
The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
D. Dash, J.
Basu
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail given that the co-accused were released and no specific injury-causing role was identified?
Whether a delay in concluding the trial warrants reconsideration of the bail application after an earlier denial?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Blapl No.6743 of 2020 Petitioner
State
D. Dash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
