Disposed

Rajesh Kumar Prusty v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC6 Apr 2024BLAPL/1108/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Third bail application by an accused in a murder and attempted murder trial arising from a Badagada police case. Seven prosecution witnesses examined had turned hostile; the court granted regular bail with monthly police station appearances and conditions against witness intimidation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on terms fixed by the trial court; monthly appearance at jurisdictional police station till end of trial; no witness intimidation; variance open to prosecuti

Rajesh Kumar Prusty Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No. 1108 of 2024

¶3

Rajesh Kumar Prusty

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. B. Pujhari, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha

¶8

…. Opposite Party

¶9

Mr. T.K. Praharaj, SC

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

ORDER

06.04.2024

Order No.

Memo of appearance filed by learned counsel Mr. B. Pujhari appearing for the Petitioner is taken on record.

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶17

The Petitioner is an accused in connection with S.T. Case No.215 of 2023 pending on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar, Dist-Ganjam, arising out of Badagada P.S. Case No.08 of 2023 for commission of alleged offence under Section 341/323/325/307/302/294/34 of IPC.

¶18

Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. case is pending in any other Court. 5. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar by order dated 31.01.2024 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

This is the third journey of the Petitioner to this Court. Earlier bail application of the Petitioner was disposed of by this Court by order dated 24.07.2023 in BLAPL No.7599 of 2023. Thereafter, the Petitioner’s bail application was disposed by this Court by order dated 20.12.2023 in BLAPL No.11696 of 2023.

¶21

It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner is in custody since 25.05.2023 and the allegation against the present Petitioner and the co-accused is that they caused death of one Baya Gouda and in the process one Raju Swain was injured.

¶22

One Ulla Gouda was the informant.

¶23

It is submitted that in the meanwhile 7 prosecution witnesses have been examined and none of them have supported the prosecution.

¶24

Learned counsel for the Petitioner invites the attention of this Court to the deposition of P.W.1-Raju Swain, who is stated to be along with the deceased on the relevant day and that of the informant Ulla Gouda-P.W.4 who is stated to be the uncle of the deceased. Both the witnesses have resiled and referring to the nature of evidence on record, it is submitted that further continuance of the Petitioner in custody is not warranted.

¶25

10 The evidence of P.W.7-Rama Chandra Swain, submitted by the learned counsel for the State is taken on record.

¶26

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that during currency of trial, this Court ought not to make a microscopic examination of the evidence adduced.

¶27

Taking into account the prosecution case and the evidence adduced, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned court in seisin.

¶28

Page 2 of 3

¶29

Additionally, it is directed that Petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once every month on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin till conclusion of trial. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin.

¶30

Further, it is directed that Petitioner shall not in any way try to intimidate the witnesses who have already been examined or to be examined.

¶31

It shall be open to the prosecution to seek variance of this order, in the event there is any threat perception.

¶32

It is needless to state that the observations made herein are only for the purpose of consideration of the bail application. They ought not to be viewed as this Court expressing any opinion regarding the complicity of the Petitioner which has to be adjudicated independently in the impending trial.

¶33

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

¶34

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.

(V. NARASINGH)

Judge

Santoshi

Signature Not Verified

¶39

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTOSHI LENKA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 06-Apr-2024 17:48:20

¶40

Page 3 of 3

Rajesh Kumar Prusty v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar Prusty 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

Ashutosh Jena Vs Addl. Chief Secretary, Forest and Environment Dept., Bbsr

Chandramani Meher @ Chandu Vs State of Odisha

Mano Ranjita Behera Vs State of Odisha

Sashikanta Malik @ Sasikanta Malik Vs State of Odisha

Chandan Kumar Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Bijaya Kumar Sarangi Vs Monalisha Bhatta