Dismissed

Kalu @ Sukanta Das v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC30 Sept 2022BLAPL/9395/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought bail under S. 439 Cr.P.C. in a murder (S. 302 IPC) and assault case. The High Court declined bail because the applicant was allegedly the stabber, distinguishing him from a co-accused released on bail for lesser charges. The court rejected the prayer. Thin order dismissing bail.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for interim bail under S. 439 Cr.P.C. stands rejected.

Kalu @ Sukanta Das Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.9395 of 2021

¶3

Kalu @ Sukanta Das …. Petitioner M/s.A.P.Nayak , Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

State of Orissa

¶6

…. Opp. Party M/s.P.K.Patnaik, A.G.A. Mr.N.Singh, Advocate for informant

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

¶9

ORDER

¶10

Order No.

¶11

30.09.2022 I.A. No. 1671 of 2022

¶12

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

¶13

The present I.A. has been filed seeking interim bail to the petitioner in connection with Mancheswar P.S. Case No. 48 of 2021 corresponding to C.T. Case. No. 56 of 2021 pending before the learned 3^rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner could not satisfy the Court about the grounds taken in the Interlocutory Application for grant of interim bail to the petitioner.

¶15

Accordingly, the I.A. is dismissed.

¶16

¶17

BLAPL NO. 9395 of 2021

¶18

This is an application U/S. 439 of Cr.P.C. by the Petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Mancheswar P.S. Case No.48 of 2021 corresponding to C.T. Case No.56 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned 3^rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar for commission of offence punishable U/Ss. 302/324/307/450/34 of I.P.C. on the allegations that on

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

the date, time and occurrence the petitioner and another in furtherance of their common intention killed the deceased by stabbing and assaulting by means of lathi.

¶21

In the course of hearing of the bail application, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is inside jail custody since 12.02.2021 and trial has not yet commenced. It is further submitted that co-accused Chandi Nayak standing on similar footing has been granted bail by this Court in BLAPL No. 3182 of 2021 on 15.09.2021. Learned counsel for the petitioner under these submissions prays to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶22

On contrary, learned counsel for the State by placing the statement of one Tabira Bisra submits that the petitioner is wholly and solely responsible for causing death of the deceased by stabbing and post mortem report discloses five stab wounds besides other wounds on the person of the deceased which ultimately lead to death of the deceased and the petitioner having allegedly stabbed the deceased cannot be equated with co-accused Chandi Nayak released on bail against whom no allegation of stabbing is directed. The petitioner having primafacie involved in the commission of murder of the deceased and assault to the informant by means of knife should not be released on bail.

¶23

Learned counsel for the informant while echoing the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the State, further submits that the petitioner being found seen to have stabbed the deceased cannot be equated with co-accused released on bail against whom assault on the deceased by means of lathi is alleged but the petitioner having primafacie involved in a case of gruesome murder of the deceased should not be enlarged on bail.

¶24

Considering the nature and gravity of offences, especially the nature of the allegations raised against the petitioner for stabbing the deceased and assaulting the informant by means of knife and taking into consideration the other circumstance of the alleged crime and the role

¶25

// 3 //

¶26

attributed to the petitioner, which does not persuade this Court to place the petitioner on similar circumstance with co-accused released on bail and taking into consideration the statement of eye witness Tabira Bisra vividly describing the allegation against the petitioner for stabbing the deceased and assaulting the informant by means of knife, this Court considers it undesirable to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

¶27

Learned trial Court is requested to expedite the trial in terms of submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶28

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

¶29

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

¶30

( G. Satapathy)
Judge

¶31

Kishore

Kalu @ Sukanta Das v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalu @ Sukanta Das 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

Rao@Nasar Kubhar@Nasar Pandian Vs State of Orissa

Bimal Kanhar Vs State of Odisha

Kanak Bihari Pohi Vs Khirod Bihari Pradhan

Ulla @ Lalu Behera Vs State of Odisha

Janardan Nayak Vs Director of Medical Edu. and Training Orissa,Bbsr

Tuna Choudhury Vs State of Orissa