Allowed

Gopi@ Gopinath Mallick v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC12 May 2023BLAPL/10693/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 CrPC regarding an murder case, the High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Chairman, Justice S.K. Sahoo, allowed the petitioner's bail after a previous rejection. The court considered the absence of direct eyewitnesses, the prior bail grant to a co-accused, and the period of detention.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is released on bail by furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000 with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount, subject to specific conditions.

Gopi@ Gopinath Mallick Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.10693 of 2021

¶3

Gopi @ Gopinath Mallick ….

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr.S.K. Baral, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha

¶8

Opp. Party

¶9

Order No.

¶10

Mr.Manoranjan Mishra Addl.Standing Counsel CORAM: JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO ORDER 12.05.2023

¶11

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode). Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.

¶12

This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Raikia P.S. Case No.50 of 2019 corresponding to S.T. Case No.136 of 2019 pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Balliguda for offences punishable under sections 302/201/34/120-B of the Indian Penal Code and.

¶13

The prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected

¶14

// 2 //

¶15

by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Balliguda vide order dated 26.10.2021.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 21.07.2019 and when the petitioner earlier approached this Court for bail in BLAPL No.4879 of 2020, the bail application was rejected granting liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after examination of the material witnesses in the learned trial Court. Learned counsel further stated that the occurrence in question took place on 12.07.2019 and there are no eye witnesses to the occurrence and it is the prosecution case that basing on the statement of the petitioner as well as the co-accused persons Janaka Pradhan and Santanu Pradhan, the dead body of the deceased was recovered which was found buried in the river bed after digging out the earth. Learned counsel further submitted that in the meantime, trial has commenced and twenty five witnesses have been examined including the witnesses leading to the discovery of the dead body and co-accused Janaka Pradhan, who stands on the similar footing like the petitioner has been directed to be released on bail by this Court in BLAPL No.10744 of 2022 vide order dated 02.02.2023 and therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably reconsidered. Learned counsel has

¶17

Page 2 of 4

¶18

// 3 //

¶19

filed the copy of the bail order of Janaka Pradhan, which is taken on record.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and placed the evidence of P.W.1, a home guard attached to Raikia Police Station who has stated that three co-accused persons including the petitioner confessed their guilt and led the police to the spot and gave recovery of the beheaded body of a person. Learned counsel further submitted that other witnesses on that point have stated that it is the petitioner who showed them the place where the body was buried and accordingly, the dead body was recovered. However, learned counsel fairly admitted that there are no direct evidence in the case.

¶21

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the evidence adduced so far in the learned trial Court, absence of any direct evidence, change in the circumstances after rejection of the earlier bail application, release of the co-accused on bail and taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, I am inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail and direct release him on bail.

¶22

Let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/-

¶23

Page 3 of 4

¶24

// 4 //

¶25

(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 such terms and conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper including the conditions that the petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal activities, shall appear before the learned trial Court when the case would be posted for trial and shall not try to tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶26

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

¶27

sipun

¶28

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge

¶29

Digitally signed SIPUN by SIPUN BEHERA BEHERA Date: 2023.05.12 18:22:32 +05'30'

¶30

Page 4 of 4

Gopi@ Gopinath Mallick v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopi@ Gopinath Mallick 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

Madhusudan Rout @ Manna Vs State of Odisha

Purna Chandra Behera Vs State of Odisha

Sonali Pal @ Sonali Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Jamirul Sk. @ Jamir @ Javed Vs State of Odisha

Uttam Kumar Dipa Vs State of Odisha

Kangress Swain Vs State of Odisha