Allowed

Prasanna Kumar Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC18 Jan 2022ABLAPL/16047/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa granted anticipatory bail to three petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C. relating to offences under the Indian Penal Code. The court directed release upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties and adherence to specific conditions regarding interrogation and inducement.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties, availability for interrogation, and prohibition against witness inducement.

Prasanna Kumar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha — Anticipatory Bail | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No.16047 of 2021

¶3

1. Prasanna Kumar Sahoo

¶4

…. Petitioners

¶5

2. Jaga @ Jagannath Sahoo

¶6

3. Balia @ Pradipta Sahoo

¶7

Mr. A.K. Pattanaik, Advocate

-versus-

Order No.

State of Odisha

¶12

…. Opp. Party

¶13

Mr. D.K. Pani,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
18.01.2022

¶14

This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶15

counsel for the State.

¶16

This is an application under section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in connection with G.R. Case No.1394 of 2021 arising out of Dhenkanal Town P.S. Case No.508 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Dhenkanal for alleged commission of offences under sections 341/294/323/379/506/324/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

Perused the F.I.R.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner no.1 Prasanna Kumar Sahoo and the

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

informant are petty contractors and they were doing the business of supply of bricks, sand and chips to the local people for construction of house and since there was dispute and business rivalry between the two, the case has been foisted and the offences are triable by Magistrate and therefore, the anticipatory bail application of the petitioners may be favourably considered.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶22

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of accusation against the petitioners and the fact that the offences are triable by Magistrate, I am inclined to release the petitioners on anticipatory bail and accordingly, this Court directs that in the event of arrest of the petitioners in connection with the aforesaid case, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer with further conditions that they shall make themselves available for interrogation by the I.O. as and when required and they shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Investigating Officer.

¶23

Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

¶24

The ABLAPL is accordingly disposed of. Parties may utilize the soft copy of this order

¶25

Page 2 of 3

¶26

// 3 //

¶27

available in the High Court’s website or print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed vide Office Order dated 7^th January 2022.

( S.K. Sahoo)

Judge

RKM

Page 3 of 3

Prasanna Kumar Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasanna Kumar Sahoo 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

Mitu Ranjan Rout Vs State of Odisha

Rajkishor Naik Vs State of Odisha

Nirmala Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Ranjit Rout@ Chagala Vs State of Odisha

Md.Nizam Vs State of Odisha

Musri Huika@ Huika Musri Vs State of Odisha