Disposed¶22

Sankara@Sibasankar Paik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC11 Sept 2024BLAPL/2062/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Odisha High Court bail application (BLAPL No.2062 of 2024) under Sections 376(3)/506 IPC and Section 4 POCSO Act; bail refused despite victim refusing medical examination, as Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement contains specific allegation of dragging into jungle and ravishing; victim aged about 15 years; liberty to renew plea after victim's examination in trial Court or after three months if trial lags; custody since 22.10.2023; G.R. Case No.201 of 2023, Berhampur Special Court; disposed 11.09.2024.

What did the court decide?

Bail not granted at this stage; petitioner granted liberty to renew his bail plea after examination of the victim in the trial Court, or after expiry of three months if the trial is not proceeded at the expected pace. ¶22

Sankara@Sibasankar Paik Vs State of Odisha — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Orissa HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, an accused in a POCSO matter (Sections 376(3)/506 IPC read with Section 4 of the POCSO ACT) against whom the minor victim (aged about 15 years) made a specific allegation in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., should be enlarged on bail at this stage.

¶20

Court's answer

Bail refused at this stage: since there is a specific allegation against the petitioner in the victim's Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement and the victim is aged about 15 years, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his bail plea after examination of the victim in the learned trial Court.

¶20

Key takeaways

Given the petitioner is in custody since 22.10.2023, the learned trial Court is expected to see to it that the victim will be preferentially examined before the formal witnesses.ratio¶21
The petitioner may renew his bail plea after expiry of three months if the trial is not proceeded at the expected pace.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail refused at this stage — renewal permitted. High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra), order dated 11.09.2024, disposed BLAPL No.2062 of 2024 filed by Sankara @ Sibasankar Paik, accused in K. Nuagaon P.S. Case No.435 of 2023 under Sections 376(3)/506 IPC read with Section 4 of the POCSO ACT (G.R. Case No.201 of 2023) pending before the Additional District Judge-cum-Special Court under POCSO Act, Berhampur. Though counsel pointed out that the victim had refused to join medical examination, the Court perused her Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement recording a specific allegation that the petitioner dragged her into a jungle and ravished her; with the victim aged about 15 years, enlargement on bail was declined at this stage. Liberty was granted to renew the bail plea after the victim's examination in the trial Court, or after expiry of three months if the trial does not proceed at the expected pace; the trial Court was expected to examine the victim preferentially before formal witnesses. Petitioner in custody since 22.10.2023.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.2062 of 2024

¶3

Sankara @ Sibasankar Paik …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. P.C. Panda, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha

…. Opp. Party

Mr. B.K. Ragada, AGA

CORAM:

JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

Order

No.

ORDER

11.09.2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶17

2. The petitioner is an accused in connection with K. Nuagaon P.S. Case No.435 of 2023 registered under Sections 376(3)/506 of the IPC read with Section 4 of the POCSO ACT corresponding to G.R. Case No.201 of 2023 pending in the Court of learned Additional District Judgecum-Special Court under POCSO Act, Berhampur.

¶18

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. has made specific allegation against the petitioner, however, she has refused to join for medical examination.

¶19

4. I have perused the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. She has made specific allegation against the petitioner that the petitioner has dragged her into a jungle and was ravished. Since there is

¶20

specific allegation against the petitioner and the victim is aged about of 15 years, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his bail plea after examination of the victim in the learned trial Court.

¶21

5. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 22.10.2023, it is expected that the learned trial Court would see to it that the victim will be preferentially examined before the formal witnesses. The petitioner may renew his bail plea after expiry of three months, if the trial is not proceeded at the expected pace.

¶22

6. With this observation, the BLAPL is disposed.

¶23

(S.S. Mishra) Judge

¶24

amit

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: AMIT KUMAR MOHANTY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CU TTACK Date: 12-Sep-2024 18:49:50

Sankara@Sibasankar Paik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sankara@Sibasankar Paik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lita @ Baidhara Tudu Vs State of Odisha

Sudhakar Sriharia Vs State of Odisha

Ajay Kumar Das Vs State of Odisha

Sashi Malik Vs State of Odisha

Shanti Sekhar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Muna @ Manoj Kumar Naik Vs State of Odisha