Allowed

Fakira Sahu v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC5 Aug 2021CRLA/679/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRLA filed by Fakira Sahu under Section 14-A of Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act seeking reconsideration of bail. Single Judge granted interim bail for three months considering over-four-year custody, releasing appellant on providing bond. Bail not granted on merit but to mitigate detention period.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on interim bail for 3 months on furnishing bond of Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties and conditions against tampering.

Fakira Sahu Vs State of Odisha — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLA No. 679 of 2019

¶3

Fakira Sahu

¶4

Appellant

¶5

Mr. Dharanidhar Nayak, Senior Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

1. State of Odisha

¶8

2. Laxmidhara Majhi

¶9

…. Respondents

¶10

Mr. S.S. Pradhan Addl. Government Advocate

¶11

Order No.

¶12

¶13

CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
05.08.2021

¶14

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Video Conferencing/Physical Mode).

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.

¶16

This is an appeal under section 14-A of S.C. & S.T. (POA) Act, 1989 in connection with C.T. Case No.27 of 2017 (Special Act) arising out of Bhawanipatna Sadar P.S. Case No.163 of 2017 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge -cumSpecial Judge, Kalahandi, Bhawanipatna for offences punishable under sections 294/326/302/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with sections 3(1)(r)(s)/3(2)(va) of the SC & ST (POA) Act.

¶17

The appellant moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Kalahandi, Bhawanipatna which was rejected on 20.08.2019.

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is in judicial custody since 20.07.2017 and his first bail application before this Court in BLAPL No.7344 of 2017 was rejected as per order dated 21.12.2017 and then he approached this Court in CRLA No.429 of 2019, which was disposed of as withdrawn as per order dated 06.09.2019 and out of twenty five charge sheet witnesses, only six witnesses have been examined so far in the trial Court. He further submitted that in view of the nature of evidence adduced by the witnesses and the period of detention of the appellant in judicial custody, the bail application of the appellant may be favourably reconsidered.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State submits that the notice on the informant has been made sufficient in the month of February 2021.

¶21

The informant has also filed an affidavit opposing the prayer for bail.

¶22

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the period of detention of the appellant in judicial custody for more than four years and the progress of the trial so far as per the report of the learned trial Court that only six witnesses have been examined out of twenty five charge sheet witnesses and in view of the available materials on record, while not inclining to release the appellant on bail on merit, but taking into account the period of detention of the appellant in judicial custody, I am inclined to release the appellant on interim bail for a period of three months from the date of release and the appellant shall surrender

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

// 3 //

¶25

before the learned trial Court immediately on expiry of three months period.

¶26

For the above period, let the appellant be released on interim bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin over the matter with further terms and conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper and with further conditions that while on interim bail, the appellant shall not try to tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date on which the date would be fixed for trial during the period of interim bail. Violation of any conditions shall entail cancellation of bail. Accordingly, the CRLA is disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. ( S.K. Sahoo) Judge

¶27

RKM

¶28

Page 3 of 3

Fakira Sahu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fakira 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

Purna Chandra Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Janhaba @ Rajendra Seth Vs State of Odisha

Pradeep Jena @ Pradip Ku Jena Vs State of Odisha

Kanta @ Srikanta Putel Vs State of Odisha

Bhalu Murmu@Galu Vs State of Orissa

Suresh Munda Vs State of Orissa