Disposed¶31

Gopinath Naik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC14 Aug 2024BLAPL/2113/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court bail order 14.08.2024 by Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra disposing of BLAPL No.2113 of 2024: bail under S.439 Cr.P.C. for Gopinath Naik, accused u/s 302 IPC (murder, axe/spade blow on son Sushant/Sushanta Naik) in Koida P.S. Case No.77 of 2023 / G.R. Case No.581 of 2023, S.D.J.M. Bonai; earlier bail rejected by Addl. Sessions Judge Bonai (BA No.81 of 2023, 05.01.2024); custody since 19.08.2023; counsel claims P.Ws.1-4 hostile; conditions: attend every hearing, no witness influencing, cancellation possible on violation.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement on bail: petitioner to be released on bail by the Court in seisin (terms at its discretion) plus two additional conditions — attendance on every hearing date and no influencing of witnesses; prosecution empowered to seek cancellation on any violation. ¶31

Gopinath Naik Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, an accused under Section 302 IPC in Koida P.S. Case No.77 of 2023 / G.R. Case No.581 of 2023 whose earlier bail application (No.81 of 2023) was rejected on 05.01.2024, should be enlarged on bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.

¶23

Court's answer

Considering that the petitioner has been in custody since 19.08.2023, the Court was inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is directed to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter, on such terms and conditions as that Court deems just and proper, subject to additional conditions imposed by this Court.

¶25

Key takeaways

Additional bail conditions fixed: (i) the petitioner shall appear before the Court on every date of hearing; and (ii) he shall not influence any witness related to the case; if found violating any bail condition even on a single occasion, the prosecution may move the Court below for cancellation of the bail concession, and the trial Court should decide any such application on its own merit.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BLAPL No.2113 of 2024 (High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra, order dated 14.08.2024): Regular bail granted under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. to Gopinath Naik, father of the deceased, who is an accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC in Koida P.S. Case No.77 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.581 of 2023 pending before the learned S.D.J.M., Bonai. His earlier Bail Application No.81 of 2023 before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bonai had been rejected on 05.01.2024. The petitioner has been in custody since 19.08.2023; counsel submitted that eye witnesses P.Ws.1-4 examined by the trial Court have not supported the prosecution case. Bail ordered with conditions of attendance on every hearing date and non-influence of witnesses, breach permitting the prosecution to seek cancellation.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.2113 of 2024

¶3

Gopinath Naik

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr. S.S.Ray(2), Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opp. Party Mr. J.P. Patra, ASC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

Order No.

ORDER

14.08.2024

1 . The petitioner is an accused in connection with Koida P.S. Case No.77 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.581 of 2023 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Bonai.

¶15

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction from the petitioner, submits that, except the present bail application, no other bail application of the petitioner is pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R.

¶16

3. The prosecution story, is that, on 17.08.2023, at

¶17

Page 1 of 4

¶18

about 9.10 A.M., the complainant, Jashamati Naik of Sundargarh, reported that her nephew, Sushant Naik, used to consume alcohol and quarrel with the complainant and his father, Gopinath Naik. On the morning of 16.08.2023, Sushanta came to the house in a drunken state and assaulted his father. Out of anger, Gopinath Naik, brother of the complainant, assaulted his son Sushanta by means of an axe on his head, thereby causing injury. Then, the sister of Sushanta shifted the injured to the hospital for treatment. Subsequently, he died at J.P. Hospital, Rourkela during the treatment.

¶19

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the father of the deceased. The case of the petitioner is that the deceased was a drunkard. He used to come home and beat his family members. He had already injured the petitioner by breaking his knee. On the fateful day, the victim repeated the same thing. He came home in a drunken state and attacked his family members and also beaten his father on his injured leg. In a fit of rage, the petitioner picked up a spade and gave a blow on the head of the deceased, due to which the deceased succumbed to injury. This is a case of a single blow that turned to be fatal. The conduct of the victim was unbearable. Therefore, in a fit of rage, the petitioner, who is the father of the deceased, gave a single blow, as a result of which, the victim expired.He was having no intention to kill his

¶20

Page 2 of 4

¶21

son.

¶22

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the eye witnesses i.e., P.Ws.1, 2, 3 & 4 to the incident have been examined by the Court and they have not supported the prosecution case.

¶23

6. The petitioner had approached the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bonai in Bail Application No.81 of 2023 praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 05.01.2024 rejected the bail application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying for enlargement on bail.

¶24

7. The petitioner has been in custody since 19.08.2023. Therefore, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶25

8. Hence, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it would deem just and proper, subject to the following additional conditions:

¶26

(1) The petitioner shall appear before the Court, without fail, on every date of hearing; and

¶27

(2) He shall not influence any of the witnesses related to this case in any manner whatsoever.

¶28

In the event that the petitioner is found wanting for violation of any of the bail conditions imposed by

¶29

Page 3 of 4

¶30

this Court or the trial Court even on a single occasion, the prosecution is at liberty to move appropriate application before the Court below for cancellation of the concession of bail granted by this Court. If such application is filed, the trial Court should decide the application on its own merit.

¶31

9. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶32

(S.S. Mishra) Judge

¶33

Subhasis

¶34

Signature Not Verified

¶35

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 14-Aug-2024 17:47:40

¶36

Page 4 of 4

Gopinath Naik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopinath Naik 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

Tirthabasi Dora Vs State

Dinabandhu Ray Vs State

Akash Bhoi Vs State of Odisha

Jagadish Misra Vs State

Tapan Kumar Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Rahul Panda @ Rahul Kumar Panda Vs State of Odisha