Allowed

Kalu Charan Gouda v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC8 Dec 2021CRLA/556/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal under Section 14-A of the SC/ST (POA) Act, the High Court of Orissa allowed the appeal and granted bail to the appellant. The court considered prior misconduct, allegations of violent threats, and completed investigation, imposing specific reporting conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail on conditions to not engage in crime, influence witnesses, and report at Berhampur Town Police Station every alternate day between 4 PM and 7 PM.

Kalu Charan Gouda Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLA No. 556 of 2021

¶3

Kalu Charan Gouda

¶4

…. Appellant

¶5

Mr. S.K. Pattnaik, Advocate

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. State of Orissa

¶8

2. Rabindra Kumar Behera

¶9

…. Respondents Mr. Sibani Shankar Pradhan, A.G.A. In person (for Respondent No.2)

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

Order No.

08.12.2021

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. S.K. Pattnaik, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Sibani Shankar Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State.

¶17

Rabindra Kumar Behera, DTM/IC, OSRTC, Berhampur, who is the informant (respondent no.2) in this case has appeared in person in Court today.

¶18

This is an appeal under Section 14-A of S.C. & S.T. (POA) Act in connection with G.R. Case No. 38 of 2021 (SC & ST (POA) Act) corresponding to Berhampur Town P.S. Case No.132 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge -cumSpecial Judge, Berhampur for commission of offences punishable under Sections 451/294/353/506 of I.P.C. read with Sections 3(1)/3(2) of the SC & ST (POA) Act, praying to release the appellant on bail.

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

// 2 //

¶21

The prosecution allegations in brief are that while the respondent no.2 was performing and discharging his official duty, the appellant entered the office and abused him in filthy language and by showing a knife and threatened to cut his hand and neck and also threatened to kill his family members by engaging local gundas and mafia declaring that nobody including the police would come to his rescue. He was rescued by his staff while the appellant was trying to assault him. The appellant a contractual driver was out of engagement since 12.09.2018 and notice was given to him on 30.11.2018, 04.08.2020 and 07.07.2021 to vacate his quarter for which he came and threatened and tried to assault the respondent no.2. The further allegation is that on 13.10.2018 and 19.01.2019, F.I.Rs. has been registered against him on account of his unruly behaviour and that he has earlier tried to set fire to buses on two or three occasions.

¶22

Mr. Pattnaik, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is in custody since 15.09.2021. He further submits that the false allegations have been made against the appellant as he was protesting against issue of notice to vacate the staff quarters, while this case was pending in the Labour Court. He further submits that the appellant is ready and willing to abide any condition which shall be imposed for granting him bail and that no useful purpose will be served by detaining the appellant in custody as the investigation has been completed in the meanwhile. 7. Mr. Sibani Shankar Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate opposes the prayer for bail stating that the appellant has prior criminal antecedents and may again assailed respondent no.2 and attack his family members if he is released on bail.

¶23

The respondent no.2 who has appeared in person opposed the prayer for bail submitting that the appellant has threatened to

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

// 3 //

¶26

kill him and harm his family members for which out of fear he has sent his family members to his native place and is himself apprehensive.

¶27

Considering the respective submissions, nature of allegations against the appellant, the punishment prescribed for the offences alleged to have been committed by him, the period spent by him in judicial custody and the fact that investigation in the case is over, I am inclined to allow the appeal and release the appellant on bail.

¶28

Let the appellant- Kalu Charan Gouda 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 following conditions :

¶29

(I) He will not indulge in any criminal activity while on bail.

¶30

(II) He will not threaten or try to influence prosecution witnesses while on bail.

¶31

(III) He will report before Berhampur Town Police Station every alternate day between 4.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.

¶32

Violation of any condition will entail in cancellation of bail/recall of the order granting bail.

¶33

Copy of this order be sent to the I.I.C., Berhampur Town Police Station for compliance.

¶34

The CRLA is accordingly disposed of.

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

(Savitri Ratho)

¶38

Judge

¶39

Sukanta

¶40

Page 3 of 3

Kalu Charan Gouda v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalu Charan Gouda 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

Sambhunath Panda Vs State of Orissa

Bibekanand Atabudhi Vs State of Odisha

Purna Chandra Malik Vs State of Odisha

Kabiraj Kharsel Vs State of Odisha

Alok Behera Vs State of Odisha

Dambrudhar Gouda@Rout Vs State of Odisha