Allowed

Mithun Patra v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC19 Mar 2024BLAPL/1373/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 CrPC, the High Court of Orissa allowed the petitioner's bail despite his criminal antecedents and rejected bail by the additional sessions judge due to his antecedents and the pendency of the trial where witnesses had already been examined.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on terms to be fixed by the learned court in seisin, including reporting to police twice weekly and not intimidating witnesses.

Mithun Patra Vs State of Odisha — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No. 1373 of 2024

¶3

Mithun Patra

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. R. Pattnaik, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha

¶8

…. Opposite Party Mr. T.K. Praharaj, SC

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

ORDER

19.03.2024

Order No.

01.

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

¶15

The Petitioner is an accused in connection with G.R. Case No.1038 of 2022 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Barbil arising out of Joda P.S. Case No.360 of 2022 for commission of alleged offences under Sections 394 of IPC.

¶16

Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail applications of the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. case is pending in any other Court.

¶17

Being aggrieved by the rejection of their application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Champua by order dated 15.11.2023 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

¶18

This is the second journey of the Petitioner to this Court. Earlier the bail application of the Petitioner was allowed by this Court by order dated 10.02.2023 in BLAPL No.921 of 2023 subject to verification of criminal antecedent of similar nature.

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

Since the Petitioner has criminal antecedent of similar nature, learned Court in seisin rejected the bail application of the Petitioner.

¶21

It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner is in custody since 18.12.2022 and as in the meanwhile trial has already commenced and some of the material witnesses have already been examined, he may be released on bail.

¶22

Learned counsel for the State referring to the order of rejection opposes the prayer for bail inter alia on the ground that the Petitioner has two criminal antecedents of similar nature and of recent origin.

¶23

It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner has been released on bail in those cases.

¶24

Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that this Court by order dated 10.02.2023 in BLAPL No.921 of 2023 had directed the Petitioner to be released on bail subject to verification of criminal antecedents. Since the Petitioner has criminal antecedents which was not stated while seeking bail, his I.A. for modification was also rejected.

¶25

10-A. Referring to the same, learned counsel for the State submits that since the Petitioner did not approach this Court with clean hands, his bail application does not deserve further consideration.

¶26

Considering that in the meanwhile material witnesses i.e. P.Ws.2, 4, 5 & 6 have been examined, this Court directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin.

¶27

Additionally, keeping in view his criminal antecedent, it is directed that the Petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional

¶28

Page 2 of 3

¶29

police station twice every week 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 learned Court in seisin.

¶30

It is further directed that the Petitioner shall not in any way try to intimidate the witnesses who have already deposed or any other Prosecution witnesses.

¶31

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

¶32

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

¶33

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

¶34

(V. NARASINGH)
Judge
Ayesha

¶35

Signature Not Verified

¶36

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYESHA ROUT Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 20-Mar-2024 14:34:01

¶37

Page 3 of 3

Mithun Patra v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithun Patra 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

Antarjyami Palei Vs State of Odisha

Md. Pyare Vs State of Odisha

Md. Imran @ Imu Vs State of Odisha

Rajamandri Karthik Vs State of Odisha

Sitaram Sadangi Vs State of Odisha

Ananda Dandia Vs State of Odisha