Allowed

Anshuman Mohapatra v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC22 Nov 2021CRLA/259/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this appeal under the S.C. & S.T. (POA) Amendment Act, the High Court of Orissa considered the bail application of the appellant accused of caste-based offences including assault and abuse. The court allowed the appeal and ordered the appellant's release on bail, fixing terms to prevent criminal activity and influencing witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Appellant Anshuman Mohapatra to be released on bail on terms to be fixed by the Court below, including conditions not to indulge in criminal activity or influence witnesses.

Anshuman Mohapatra Vs State of Odisha — Caste Atrocities | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLA No. 259 of 2021

¶3

Anshuman Mohapatra

¶4

…. Appellant Mr. Gautam Mukherji, Senior Advocate

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Orissa & Another

¶7

…. Respondents Mr. Sibani Shankar Pradhan, A.G.A.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

Order No.

22.11.2021

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. Gautam Mukherji, learned Senior Advocate along with Mr. Ankita Mukherji, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Sibani Shankar Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State. None appears for the Respondent no.2-informant or the victim.

¶15

BLAPL No.3099 of 2021 has been converted to CRLA No.259 of 2021 by order dated 07.05.2021. Notice had been sent to the injured-victim and informant through the I.I.C., Keonjhar Police Station and as per instructions received by Mr. Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate, notice issued in BLAPL No.3099 of 2021 has been served on them on 13.05.2021.

¶16

On the last date none had appeared for the Informant – respondent No 2 or the victim-injured . So by way of abundant caution, the Registry had been directed to find out if any counsel had appeared on behalf of Respondent no.2 /Opp party No 2 or the victim in BLAPL No.3099 of 2021 and the dealing assistant

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

computer filing has reported after verification that no Vakalatnama has been filed in CRLA 259 of 2021 or BL APL No. 3099 of 2021 till 18.11.2021 .

¶20

This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of S.C. & S.T. (POA) Amendment Act in connection with Special G.R. Case No. 4 of 2021 corresponding to Keonjhar P.S. Case No.43 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned Special Judge -cum- Sessions Judge, Keonjhar for commission of offences punishable under Sections 341/323/294/354/354-A/506/34 of I.P.C. read with Sections 3(1)(r) & (s) and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC & ST (PA) Act. 6. The prosecution allegations in brief are that on 28.01.2021 at about 4.30 p.m. while the informant who happens to be an Advocate had been to her brother’s land along with mason and labourers for construction work, the present appellant, his brother Diptiman and his wife Damanyanti who were present in the adjacent plot, suddenly came near the informant with iron rods and abused her and the appellant assaulted her with chappal .As a result the informant fell down and sustained injury on her head. At this time one Basanti Naik who was working inside a nearby house, came to the spot and the accused persons scolded her and abused her referring to her caste, pushed her and pulled her saree and threatened to commit rape on her.

¶21

Mr. Gautam Mukherji, learned Senior Advocate submits that the false allegations have been made against the appellant and his family members on account of civil dispute between the parties and one Prasanta Mishra, who is the father of the sister-inlaw of the informant has filed Title Suit No.124 of 2007 against his brother and others including the appellant as the appellant has purchased a portion of land which is involved in the suit. He further submits that the appellant is in custody since April 2021

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

// 3 //

¶24

and had been granted interim bail for a period of one month by this Court and has not misused the liberty granted to him. He further submits that the investigation is over and no useful purpose will be served by detaining the appellant in custody. He also submits that the informant and the victim have sustained only simple injuries which are abrasions and bruises and strain to back and chest.

¶25

Mr. Sibani Shankar Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate does not dispute the submission that charge sheet has been filed in this case on 13.06.2021 and the nature of injuries sustained by the informant and the victim.

¶26

Considering the respective submissions, nature of allegations against the appellant, the punishment prescribed for the said offences and the fact that investigation in the case is over and the period of detention of the appellant in judicial custody, I am inclined to allow the appeal and release the appellant on bail.

¶27

Let the appellant- Anshuman Mohapatra be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the learned Court below in seisin over the matter, including the conditions that the appellant will not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not threaten or try to influence prosecution witnesses while on bail.

¶28

The CRLA is accordingly disposed of.

¶29

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper

¶30

application.

¶31

.........................

¶32

(Savitri Ratho)

¶33

Judge

¶34

Sukanta

¶35

Page 3 of 3

Anshuman Mohapatra v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anshuman Mohapatra 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

Pradip Samal Vs State

Sibaram @ Siba Chandra Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Snehalata Behera @ Snehalata Dehury Vs Bankanidhi Dehury

Lankepalli Raju Vs State of Odisha

Misala Siba Vs State of Odisha

Shaikh Hasib Vs State of Odisha