Dismissed

Bikram Rout v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC8 Nov 2021BLAPL/8349/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa rejected a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by a petitioner accused of murdering his wife in a dowry-related case. The Court held that the gravity of the offence precluded bail release but directed the trial court to expedite proceedings within six months.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; trial directed to be commenced and expedited within six months.

Bikram Rout Vs State of Odisha — Dowry and Cruelty | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No. 8349 of 2021

¶3

Bikram Rout

¶4

…. Petitioners

¶5

Mr.P.K.Nayak, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha

¶8

…. Opposite Party Mr.K.K.Gaya, ASC

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Order No.

ORDER

08.11.2021

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.

¶16

This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner in connection with Banarpal P.S. Case No.28 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 194 of 2020(C.T.(S) Case No. 29 of 2020) pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Angul.

¶17

Perused the F.I.R. and other documents besides the impugned order dated 06.09.2021 as at Annexure-3.

¶18

As per the F.I.R., the complainant alleged that the deceased daughter was given in marriage to the petitioner and thereafter, was subjected to torture on account of dowry demand of Rs.5 lac and also described other events and finally, alleged that all the accused persons killed her by strangulation but was given a color of suicide. In that connection, Banarpal P.S. Case No. 28 of 2020 was registered and the petitioner was arrested and forwarded to the court.

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused is in judicial custody since 11.02.2020 and in the meantime, his parents have been granted bail and admitted that the accused is charge sheeted under section 302 IPC with other offences. It is also contended that if this court is not inclined to grant bail, an order may be passed to expedite the trial within a stipulated period.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State opposed the bail of the petitioner and contended that the victim had a homicidal death which is clearly revealed from the post mortem report as the cause of death is shown to be Asphyxia on account of strangulation.

¶22

On perusal of the post mortem report, the death is stated to be due to strangulation and ligature mark as ante mortem in nature and death to be homicidal. The petitioner happens to be the husband of the deceased. It is submitted that the trial is not yet commenced.

¶23

Having regard to the nature and gravity of the offences alleged, the Court is of the considered view that it is not a fit case to grant bail and therefore, is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

¶24

In the result, the petition stands rejected. However, the learned trial court is requested to commence and expedite the trial and accomplish it preferably within a period of six months by unless there is any legal impediment.

¶25

The BLAPL is accordingly dismissed.

¶26

Page 2 of 2

¶27

¶28

An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.

¶29

(R.K.Pattanaik)

¶30

Judge

¶31

Page 1 of 2

Bikram Rout v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bikram Rout 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

Purushottam Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Ranjan Maharana @ Nanda Vs State of Odisha

Ishiq @ Ishaq Singh Vs State of Odisha

Soumya Ranjan Das Vs State of Odisha

Dipti Ranjan Mohanty @ Papu Vs State of Odisha

Deba@ Debasish Nayak@ Naik Vs State of Odisha