Allowed

Pagulu @ Sarata Biswal v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 May 2022BLAPL/5213/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa at Cuttack heard a bail application filed by an accused in a cheating and dishonestly inducing possession matter. The court considered the lack of substantive evidence against the petitioner apart from a co-accused statement and the fact that he has criminal antecedents. The court allowed the bail application on the condition that the petitioner must secure the appearance

What did the court decide?

Directed the JP/MFC court in seisin to release the petitioner on bail ensuring his appearance on every date of trial.

Pagulu @ Sarata Biswal Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No. 5213 of 2020

¶3

Pagulu @ Sarata Biswal

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. S.S. Chaini, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

…. State of Odisha Opposite Party

¶8

Mr. Karunakar Gaya, ASC

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

ORDER

10.05.2022

Order No.

01.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶15

Heard leaned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶16

The petitioner is an accused in C.T. Case No.708 of 2017, on the files of learned J.M.F.C. Soro, arising out of Simulia P.S. Case No.209 dated 31.07.2017, under Sections 457/395 of IPC and is in custody since 20.12.2018.

¶17

Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Sessions Judge, Balasore, by order dated 26.02.2020 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was remanded in the case at hand on 20.12.2018 and it is submitted that there are no materials to connect the petitioner with the crime except the co-accused statement.

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

The learned counsel for the State on perusal of the case diary also submits that the petitioner was not put to T.I. parade nor there was any recovery from him and does not dispute the basis of implication as stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶21

It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the State that petitioner has got criminal antecedent of similar nature hence his prayer for bail does not merit consideration of this Court.

¶22

Taking into account the circumstances under which the petitioner has been implicated in the case at hand and considering the report of the learned JMFC regarding the status of trial this Court is inclined to direct release of the petitioner on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin over the matter so as to ensure his appearance each date of trial.

¶23

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

¶24

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.

(V. NARASINGH)

Judge

Santoshi

Page 2 of 2

Pagulu @ Sarata Biswal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pagulu @ Sarata Biswal 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

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Odisha

B.Narasimlu Vs State of Odisha

B.Narasimlu Vs State of Odisha

Raghunath Kumar @ Raghunath Kumbar Vs State of Odisha

Lucky Gouda Vs State of Odisha

Kamalakanta Barik Vs State of Odisha