Allowed

Ramesh Kumar Nayak v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC5 Dec 2023BLAPL/2072/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail was granted to the petitioner in the Sessions case concerning murder and money laundering. The court found insufficient independent evidence beyond an inadmissible co-accused statement to prima facie show complicity after noting the long period of detention.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is released on bail on such terms and conditions as the court in seisin may deem fit, including an undertaking to appear on dates of posting.

Ramesh Kumar Nayak Vs State of Odisha — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No. 2072 of 2023

¶3

Ramesh Kumar Nayak

.…

Petitioner

Mr. N. Mohanty, Adv.

Versus -

State of Odisha

.…

Opp.Party

Addl. Standing Counsel

¶12

CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

ORDER

05.12.2023

Order No.

08.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶19

Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.

¶20

The petitioner is in custody since 25.12.2021 in connection with Keonjhar Sadar P.S. Case No.563 of 2021 corresponding to S.T. Case No.41 of 2022 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 302/120-B/201/34 of IPC.

¶21

As per the FIR, one Sanotsh Rout wanted to have relationship with the informant, which she declined. The informant therefore, suspects that the said Santosh Rout may have killed her husband.

¶22

Learned State Counsel submits that the petitioner’s complicity came to light from the CCTV footage of the area in which the dead body was found as also from the statement of the co-accused, Santosh.

¶23

Thus, this Court find that there is no independent and acceptable evidence to prima facie show the complicity of the petitioner save and except the confessional statement of the co-accused, which needless to say is not admissible

¶24

Page 1 of 2

¶25

evidence.

¶26

Having regard to the above fact as also the period of detention in custody, I am inclined to allow the prayer for bail. 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 impose including the condition that he shall personally appear before the trial Court on each date of posting of the case without fail.

¶27

BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶28

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶29

( Sashikanta Mishra)

¶30

Judge

¶31

A.K. Rana

¶32

Signature Not Verified

¶33

Digitally Signed Signed by: AJAYA KUMAR RANA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 06-Dec-2023 11:02:39

¶34

Page 2 of 2

Ramesh Kumar Nayak v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Kumar Nayak 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharat Lal Rout Vs State of Odisha

Balaram @ Mega Patra Vs State of Odisha

Jaswant Singh Vs State of Odisha

Sashi Sekhar Singh Vs State of Odisha

Sunil Kumar Jena @ Butuna Jena Vs State of Odisha

Bilasini Kuanr Vs State of Odisha