Allowed

Binodini@Banita Sahu v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC5 Apr 2023CRLA/254/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Orissa allowed bail to the appellant Binodini Sahu in a criminal appeal challenging bail rejection under the SC/ST (PoA) Act. The Court, observing she was in judicial custody while a co-accused was already on bail, and invoking Section 437(1) Cr.P.C., granted release on bail.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail with a bond of Rs. 50,000 and two local solvent sureties for the same amount, subject to conditions of appearance and non-hindrance to prosecution.

Binodini@Banita Sahu Vs State of Odisha — Caste Atrocities | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLA No. 254 of 2023

¶3

Binodini @ Banita Sahu

¶4

Appellant

¶5

Mr.Bikas Mishra, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha & another

¶8

…. Respondents

¶9

Mrs.Susamarani Sahoo, Addl. Standing Counsel

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO

ORDER

Order No.

02.

05.04.2023

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

¶17

This is an appeal under section 14-A of S.C. & S.T. (PoA) Act, 1989 in connection with C.T. Case No.27(A) of 2017 arising out of Bhawanipatna Sadar P.S. Case No.163 of 2017 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge -cumSpecial Judge, Kalahandi, Bhawanipatna for offences punishable under sections 294/326/302/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 3(2)(va) of the S.C. & S.T. (PoA) Act.

¶18

The appellant moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Sessions Judge –cum- Special Judge, Bhawanipatna, which was rejected on 20.02.2023.

¶19

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant Binodini @ Banita Sahu is in judicial custody since 06.02.2023 on her surrendering before the learned

¶20

// 2 //

¶21

Court below and she along with the other co-accused persons has been charge sheeted under sections under sections 294/326/302/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 3(2)(va) of the S.C. & S.T. (PoA) Act. It is further submitted that the occurrence in question took place on 08.07.2017 and as per the eye witness account, the deceased Jogeswar Majhi was assaulted by the son of the appellant, namely, Fakir Sahu with a tangia on his head and hand as a result of which the deceased died and so far as the role attributed against the appellant and also her husband Bibhi Sahu is concerned, it is stated that they are the abettors. Learned counsel further submitted that similarly situated co-accused Bibhi Sahu has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in BLAPL No. 7344 of 2017 as per order dated 21.12.2017, copy of which has been annexed to the bail application as Annexure-5. It is further submitted that the appellant being a lady, in view of the proviso to section 437(1) of Cr.P.C., the bail application of the appellant may be favourably considered.

¶22

Learned counsel for the State has produced the case diary and opposed the prayer for bail. He placed the statement of an eye witness Lokanath Gahir from which it appears that specific overt act has been attributed against the co-accused Fakir Sahu to have assaulted the deceased by means of a tangia.

¶23

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of accusation against the appellant, since similarly situated co-accused has already been released on bail, taking into

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

// 3 //

¶26

account the period of detention of the appellant in judicial custody and keeping in view of the proviso to section 437(1) of Cr.P.C., I am inclined to release the appellant on bail.

¶27

Let the appellant be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (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 further conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper with further conditions that she shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date to which the case would be posted for trial and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶28

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

¶29

The CRLA is accordingly disposed of.

¶30

Issue urgent certified copy of this order on proper application.

¶31

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge

¶32

PKSahoo

¶33

Page 3 of 3

Binodini@Banita Sahu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binodini@Banita Sahu 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

Kalia@Situ@Sitaram Barik Vs State of Odisha

Banty@Umakanta Sahu Vs Odisha

Ramakanta Panda Vs State of Odisha

Karunakar Mohanty@Thulu Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Tulu Mistri@Durga Prasad Das Vs State of Odisha

Gopal @ Bhimadev Sahu Vs State of Odisha