Dumar Ganda Vs State of Odisha

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State. Perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶20

This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the Petitioner for bail in connection with Borigumma P.S.Case No.123 of 2023 corresponding to G.R.Case No.224 of 2023 pending in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Borigumma for alleged commission of offence under Sections 341,294, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code..

¶21

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that the Petitioner No.1, is

¶22

Page 1 of 3.

¶23

languishing in custody since 25.12.2023 and so far Petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 are concerned, they are in custody since 15.01.2024. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that in the meantime investigation has been concluded and final Charge Sheet has been filed. Further, referring to the F.I.R. allegation, learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that as per the F.I.R. allegation, the Petitioner No.1-Dumer Ganda has assaulted the injured, who had sustained two grievous injuries. So far Petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 are concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that they were present at the spot but no allegation of assault has been made out against them. He further contended that so far assault part is concerned, the same was not on any vital part of the body. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that since the Petitioners belong to the locality, there is no chance of their absconding. He also contended that the Petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioners prays for release of the Petitioners on bail.

¶24

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, objected to the prayer for bail of the Petitioners’ on the ground that the allegations made in the F.I.R. are serious in nature. He further contended that the injuries sustained by the injured were grievous in nature. He also contended that in the event the Petitioners are released on bail they may abscond and in such eventuality, delay would cause in conclusion of trial. In such view of the matter learned counsel or the State submitted that the bail application of the Petitioners be rejected at this juncture.

¶25

Having heard learned counsels for the parties, on careful examination of surrounding facts of the present case and materials on

¶26

Page 2 of 3.

¶27

record as well as taking into consideration the fact that so far Petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 are concerned there is no allegation of assault against Petitioner Nos. 2 & 3, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the Petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 and it is directed that let the Petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand) each with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter. Further, the release of the Petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 shall also be subject to the terms and conditions that would be fixed by the learned court in seisin over the matter.

¶28

So far Petitioner No.1 is concerned, the bail application stands rejected in respect of Petitioner No.1 with liberty to Petitioner No.1 to move the trial court afresh for bail.

¶29