Dismissed

Prasant Kumar Sahu v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC15 Nov 2021BLAPL/86/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application in a murder case was rejected by this Court, which found no fit case for release. The Court also directed the trial court to conclude the trial by June 2022 and granted liberty to move afresh in case of delay.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for bail rejected; BLAPL dismissed; Direction to trial court to complete trial by June 2022; Liberty to seek bail afresh in case of delay.

Prasant Kumar Sahu Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.86 of 2019

¶2

Prasant Kumar Sahu

¶3

…. Petitioner

¶4

Mr.Balaram Nayak, Advocate

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Odisha

…. Opp. Party

Mr.P.C.Das, ASC

CORAM:

JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

Order No.

15.11.2021

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶16

Heard Mr.Balaram Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.C.Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.

¶17

This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner-Prasant Kumar Sahu in connection with Nabarangapur P.S. Case No.167 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. Case No.574 of 2018 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Nabarangapur registered for commission of offence punishable under Section 302/201/34 of I.P.C. and now pending before the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Nabarangpur in C.T. No.09 of 2019.

¶18

The petitioner had moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Nabarangpur, which was rejected on 28.08.2018.

¶19

The case of the prosecution in brief is that the deceasedGanesh Majhi and Minakhi Panigrahi, the wife of the present petitioner were working as Teachers in Sanakumuli U.P. School

¶20

1 of 3

¶21

// 2 //

¶22

and as the wife of the petitioner and deceased-Ganesh returned home together on some occasions, the petitioner suspected them to be having an affair and because of this, on the date of occurrence, i.e., 10.8.2018, the petitioner along with co-accused, Padmanabha Mishra @ Bulu @ Babula assaulted the deceased, which resulted in his death. It is alleged that the petitioner assaulted the deceased with tangia and the co-accused, Padmanabha Mishra @ Bulu @ Babula assaulted the deceased with lathi.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 18.8.2018 and that the co-accusedPadmanabha Mishra @ Bulu @ Babula who is stated to have assaulted the deceased alongwith the petitioner has been released on bail by this Court in BLAPL No.101 of 2019 vide order dated 5.8.2019. He also submits that some witnesses have been examined during trial and out of them P.Ws.9, 13, 14 and 16 have not supported the prosecution case. He further submits that the alleged weapon of offence, namely, tangia has not been recovered at the instance of the petitioner has been recovered at the instance of co-accused who has been released on bail.

¶24

Mr. P.C. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel opposes to the prayer for bail stating that P.W.11-Jatia Majhi, P.W.12Haldhar Majhi and P.W.15-Dhania Bhatra have implicated the petitioner, for which there is no ground to release the petitioner on bail.

¶25

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for respective parties, nature of allegations against the petitioner, the materials collected by the prosecution and the sentences prescribed for the offence alleged against the petitioner, I do not think that this is a fit case to release the petitioner on bail.

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

// 3 //

¶28

Hence, the prayer for bail is rejected and the BLAPL is dismissed.

¶29

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 18.8.2018 and trial has not yet been completed, I request the learned trial court to dispose of the trial by the end of June, 2022. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to move for bail afresh, in case there is delay in completion of trial.

¶30

A copy of this order be sent to the learned Sessions Judge, Nabarangpur forthwith.

¶31

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶32

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

¶33

Bichi

¶34

Page 3 of 3

Prasant Kumar Sahu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasant Kumar Sahu 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

Gopal Chandra Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Saswati Mitra Vs State of Odisha

Somnath Acharya Vs State of Odisha

Abhimanyu Mishra Vs Souri Shankar Parida

Gaya Kumar Senapati Vs State of Odisha(Vig.)

Dillip Singh Vs State of Orissa