Allowed

Chandrakanta Sadangi v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC2 Mar 2023BLAPL/12785/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application concerning alleged dowry death under IPC sections, the Court noted evidence suggesting the petitioner resided in Delhi at the relevant time. Relying on this fact and the detention period, the Court allowed bail subject to appearing before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with a condition to personally appear before the Court below on each date of posting of the case.

Chandrakanta Sadangi Vs State of Odisha — Matrimonial and Divorce | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No. 12785 of 2022

¶3

Chandrakanta Sadangi … Petitioner

¶4

Mr. J. Sahoo, Advocate

¶5

-Versus -

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opposite Party

¶8

Addl. Standing Counsel

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

¶11

ORDER

¶12

02.03.2023

¶13

Order No. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶14

02.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

¶16

This is the second journey of the petitioner to this Court seeking bail. His earlier application was rejected as per order passed by this Court in BLAPL No.9154 of 2022. He is in custody since 15.09.2022 in connection with Jagannath Prasad P.S. Case No. 101 of 2013, under Sections 498-A/304B/306/406/34 of I.P.C. read with Section 4 of D P Act, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 434-A of 2013, committed to S.T. case No.126 of 2022 in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar.

¶17

It is alleged that the petitioner and his family members subjected his wife to cruelty in connection with demand for dowry, as a result of which she committed suicide by hanging.

¶18

It is submitted by Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner that even as per the prosecution case, the petitioner

¶19

Page 1 of 1

¶20

was residing at Delhi at the relevant time and therefore, the offence under Section 306, I.P.C prima facie, is not made out. Mr. Sahoo, has also referred to depositions of some independent witnesses the certified copies of which are filed in Court today. It is seen that some of them have stated that the petitioner was residing at Delhi at the time of death of the deceased.

¶21

Having regard to above fact and the period of detention in custody and I am inclined to allow the prayer for bail.

¶22

Let the petitioner be released on bail on such terms and conditions as the Court in seisin over the matter may deem fit and proper to impost including that he shall personally appear before the Court below on each date of posting of the case and in case of even a single default, the Court shall pass necessary orders to take him to custody again.

¶23

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶24

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper

¶25

application.

¶26

(Sashikanta Mishra) Judge

¶27

Deepak

¶28

Page 2 of 2

Chandrakanta Sadangi v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrakanta Sadangi 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

Pandab Patra Vs State of Odisha

Rakesh Roy@Rakesh Bala Vs State of Odisha

Duryodhan Nayak Vs State and Ors.

Debabrat Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Bishnubrata Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Sanjaya Kumar Nayak Vs State of Odisha