Allowed

Biswajit Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC16 May 2023BLAPL/130/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa granted bail to the petitioner in a murder case under sections 302/201 IPC. The court considered the circumstantial nature of evidence, the petitioner's lack of criminal antecedents, and the delay in trial proceedings, concluding that bail was permissible subject to conditions against tampering.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by execution of a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties for like amount.

Biswajit Sahoo Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.130 of 2023

¶3

Biswajit Sahoo ….

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr.D. Das, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha

¶8

…. Opp. Party

¶9

Mr.P.B. Tripathy Addl.Standing Counsel

¶10

Order No.

¶11

¶12

CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
16.05.2023
This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel for the State.

¶13

This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Athagarh P.S. Case No.42 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. Case No.36 of 2020 pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Athagarh for offences punishable under sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Athagarh, which was rejected on 05.05.2021.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

¶16

// 2 //

¶17

the petitioner is in judicial custody since 08.02.2020 and he has been charge sheeted under sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel further submitted that earlier two bail applications of the petitioner have been rejected by this Court and at present out of thirty-seven charge sheeted witnesses, eighteen witnesses have been examined and there is no direct evidence and the case is based on circumstantial evidence. Learned counsel further submitted that it is the prosecution case that at the instance of the petitioner and on the basis of his statement recorded under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, the dead body of the deceased so also the weapon of offences i.e. iron rod and spade were recovered. Learned counsel further submitted that in view of the delayed disposal of the trial, the nature of evidence adduced so far in the learned trial Court, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered.

¶18

Learned counsel for the state has produced the case diary and on verification of the same, he fairly submitted that the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel further placed the evidence of P.W.-16 Jajati Keshari Kantha, who is a witness leading to the recovery of the dead body as well as the weapon of offences. Learned counsel further submitted that some important witnesses are yet to be examined in the trial Court and there is every possibility

¶19

Page 2 of 3

¶20

// 3 //

¶21

of tampering with the evidence in case, the petitioner is enlarged on bail.

¶22

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, nature of evidence adduced by the prosecution, the fact that the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and the case is based on circumstantial evidence and taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

¶23

Let the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000.00 (rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court in seisin over the matter with further terms and conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper including the conditions that the petitioner shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date to which the case is posted for trial and shall not try to tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶24

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

¶25

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶26

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

¶27

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge

¶28

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: SIPUN BEHERASipun Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA Date: 17-May-2023 14:53:51

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Biswajit Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biswajit 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

Abhiram Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Amiya Mohanty@Nikin Vs State of Odisha

Nityananda Barik Vs State of Odisha

Basanta Ku. Mohapatr Vs the State.

Munfed Khan Vs State of Odisha

Mahamud Khan Vs State of Odisha