The High Court of Orissa allowed an appeal against an order refusing bail. The court granted release on bail after considering the period of detention, completion of investigation, and submissions made by the learned counsel.
The appellant, Pintu @ Digambar Sasamal, was released on bail subject to terms and conditions to be fixed by the lower court.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLA No.333 of 2021
…. Pintu @ Digambar Sasamal Appellant
Mr.G.K.Nayak (2), Advocate
Versus
1.State of Odisha 2.Manas Ranjan Sethi
…. Respondents
Mr.P.C.Das, ASC (for Respondent No.1) None for Respondent No.2
CORAM:
JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
ORDER
17.11.2021
Order No.
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
Mr. P.C.Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel states that notice has been served through the local I.I.C. on respondent No.2 on 19.9.2021, and thereafter, pursuant to order passed by this Court, the I.O. had been directed to intimate the respondent No.2. about the next date of posting of the case. But none appears for the respondent No.2 when the matter is called.
Heard Mr.G.K.Nayak (2), learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. P.C.Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.
This appeal has been preferred by the appellant, namely, Pintu @ Digambar Sasamal under Section 14 (A) (2) of SC & ST (POA) Act against the order dated 13.07.2021 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Bhanjanagar in Special G.R. Case No.25 of 2021 corresponding to Jagannath Prasad P.S. Case No.218 of 2021 for commission of offence under Sections 341/294/506/353/34 of I.P.C. read with Section 3 (1) (r) and Section 3
1 of 2
// 2 //
(2) (va) of SC & ST (POA) Act, refusing to release the appellant on bail.
Learned counsel for the appellant states that the appellant is in custody since 1.7.2021 and co-accused, Narayan Sethi has been granted bail by the same order because he belongs to Scheduled Caste. He further states that apart from the offences under Section 3 (1) (r) and Section 3 (2) (va) of S.C. and S.T. (P.O.A.) Act, the other offences are triable by Magistrate.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, the nature of allegations against the appellant, period of detention of the appellant in judicial custody and the fact that investigation has been completed in the meanwhile, I am inclined to allow this appeal and the prayer for bail.
Let the appellant- Pintu @ Digambar Sasamal be released on bail in the above noted case on such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the learned Court below in seisin over the matter including the condition that the appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
The CRLA is accordingly disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
(Savitri Ratho) Judge
Page 2 of 2
Bichi
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail application filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC & ST (POA) Act should be allowed.
Whether the appellant deserves release on bail considering the period of detention and completion of investigation.
Whether to distinguish the appellant's bail eligibility from that of a co-accused who belongs to the Scheduled Caste.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Pintu @ Digambar Sasamal
State of Odisha
Manas Ranjan Sethi
Savitri Ratho
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
