Allowed

Kuldip Naik @ Chhandacharan Naik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC20 Dec 2023BLAPL/13169/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Orissa allowed bail for two petitioners accused of theft under Sections 457, 380, and 34 IPC, imposing specific undertakings and reporting requirements despite the investigation not being fully concluded.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for bail allowed; petitioners released on bail subject to terms fixed below and verification of antecedents.

Kuldip Naik @ Chhandacharan Naik Vs State of Odisha — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 13169 of 2023

¶2

….. 1. Kuldip Naik @ Chhandacharan Naik

¶3

Petitioners

¶4

2. Sachin Bhoi

¶5

Mr. Manas Kumar Chand, Advocate Vs.

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

….. Opposite Party Mr. D.K. Mishra, AGA

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER

20.12.2023

Order No.

(Through hybrid mode)

¶14

1. This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of

¶15

bail to the petitioners in connection with Narla P.S. Case No. 218 of

¶16

2023 corresponding to C.T. Case No. 450 of 2023 pending in the Court

¶17

of the learned J.M.F.C., M. Rampur registered under Sections 457, 380

¶18

and 34 of IPC against unknown persons.

¶19

2. The prayer for bail of the petitioners has been rejected vide order dated 09.11.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhawanipatna in Bail Application No. 396 of 2023.

¶20

3. The prosecution case in brief against the petitioners is that on15.10.2023 in the absence of his father-in-law from his house, the lock of his house had been broken and TV, fridge and other electronic appliances had been stolen from the house. The informant came to learn from the villagers that the theft has been committed by Kuldeep

¶21

Naik, Sachin Bhoi and Roshan Sahu of village Palsasada and the stolen

¶22

Page 1 of 3

¶23

articles sold to Gajindra Sahu.

¶24

4. Mr. Manas Kumar Chand, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in custody since 20.10.2023 (inadvertently stated in the petition as 25.10.2023). He further submits that the petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents and as investigation in the case is practically over, the prayer for bail may be sympathetically considered.

¶25

5. Mr. D.K. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate opposes the prayer for bail stating that investigation has not been completed and all the stolen articles have not been recovered for which the prayer for bail may be rejected.

¶26

6. Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioners, the punishment prescribed for the offence which they are alleged to have committed and the submission that they do not have any criminal antecedents, I am inclined to allow the prayer for bail.

¶27

7. The petitioners-Kuldip Naik @ Chhandacharan Naik and Sachin Bhoi shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be

¶28

fixed by the learned Court below in seisin over the matter, subject to verification of their criminal antecedents, including the following conditions:

¶29

(i) They will not indulge in any criminal activity while on bail.

¶30

(ii) They will not threaten or try to influence prosecution

¶31

Page 2 of 3

¶32

witnesses while on bail.

¶33

(iii) They will co-operate with the investigation and report before the IIC, Narla Police Station, once every alternate Sunday

¶34

between 10.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon, till conclusion of trial.

¶35

8. Violation of any condition will entail in cancellation of bail/ recall of this order.

¶36

9. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶37

10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper

¶38

application.

¶39

11. Copy of this order be supplied to Mr. D.K. Mishra, learned

¶40

Additional Government Advocate for onward transmission to the IIC,

¶41

Narla Police Station.

¶42

(Savitri Ratho)
Judge

¶43

puspa

¶44

Signature Not Verified

¶45

Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 22-Dec-2023 10:22:08

¶46

Page 3 of 3

Kuldip Naik @ Chhandacharan Naik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldip Naik @ Chhandacharan Naik 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

Balakrushna Bariha Vs State of Odisha

Surendra Kumar Dalai Vs State of Odisha

Bishnu Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Tikeswar Bhosagar Vs State of Odisha

Gajendra Sahuy @ Gajendra Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Lalit Sahu Vs State of Odisha