Banshidhar Jena @ Katibabu Vs State of Odisha

1 . The petitioner is an accused in connection with Jaleswar P.S. Case No.117 of 2023 corresponding to C.T. Case No.130 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 376(1)/354-C/384/506 of the IPC read with Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 pending in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Jaleswar.

¶14

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.

¶15

3. The alleged incident had taken place on 13.09.2022, whereas the F.I.R. was registered after

¶16

Page 1 of 4

¶17

164 days delay, i.e. on 13.03.2023. During the investigation, the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr. P.C. and in her statement, she inter alia , stated that on the pretext of taking the victim to the bank for arranging loan for the Self Help Group, the petitioner took the victim to Jaleswar and confined her in a room and committed the crime. She could not report to the police because her husband was working at Hyderabad. Once her husband came to the village, everything was disclosed to him and thereafter the F.I.R. was lodged.

¶18

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the F.I.R. was filed only when the wife of the petitioner came to know about the affairs between the victim and the petitioner and she started quarreling with the victim. Thereafter, the F.I.R. was lodged.

¶19

5. This incident came to the light once the petitioner viral the photographs of the victim. The victim refused to undergo medical test for the reason that the incident had taken place about 164 days before and the husband of the victim refused to cooperate for the purpose of medical test.

¶20

6. The petitioner had approached the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Balasore, Circuit at Jaleswar in Bail Application No.03 of 2024 praying for grant of bail. The learned Court below vide its order dated 03.01.2024 has rejected the bail application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the

¶21

Page 2 of 4

¶22

present petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. praying for enlargement on bail.

¶23

7. The petitioner is in custody since 15.11.2023 and the trial in the present case is likely to take some time. Therefore, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶24

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 including the following additional conditions:

¶25

(1) The petitioner shall not contact either the victim or the husband of the victim in any manner whatsoever.

¶26

(2) The petitioner shall appear before the Court without fail and without seeking adjournment on any pretext.

¶27

Non-cooperation in the investigation and/or violation of the bail conditions shall entail consideration for cancellation of the bail granted to the petitioner.

¶28

8. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

(S.S. Mishra)

Judge

Subhasis

Page 3 of 4

Signature Not Verified

¶34

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 11-Aug-2024 07:31:54

¶35

Page 4 of 4

Banshidhar Jena @ Katibabu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Banshidhar Jena @ Katibabu 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

Tuni Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Manash Kumar Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Mukunda Jani Vs State of Odisha

Sudarshan Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Deepak Kindo Vs State of Odisha(Eow)

Bikash Das Vs State of Odisha