Allowed

Pusika Lachna @ Kulesika v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Dec 2024BLAPL/4386/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

During hearing of a bail application under Sec.439 Cr.P.C., the court noted the petitioner's long custody period and limited prosecution witnesses. Relying on Supreme Court precedents on speedy trial, the High Court granted bail on conditions including furnishing two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on terms to be fixed by the Sessions Judge, including furnishing two sureties and not committing other offences.

Pusika Lachna @ Kulesika Vs State of Odisha — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.4386 of 2024

¶3

Pusika Lachna@Kulesika …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Rout, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

State of Odisha

¶6

…. Opposite Party Mr. D. Mohanty, A.G.A.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY

ORDER

10.12.2024

Order No.

This is an application under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. for bail and the offences alleged are under Secs.147/148/302/120-B/149, I.P.C read with Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act and Sections 16(1)(a)/18/20 of U.A.P. Act.

¶14

Heard Mr. S.K. Rout, learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as Mr. D. Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate for State-Opposite Party.

¶15

It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that, he is inside custody since 4.2.2020 and till date the trial is pending.

¶16

Accordingly a report was called for from the learned trial court regarding stage of trial and the learned trial judge in his Letter dated 20.11.2024 has intimated that, only two witnesses out of nineteen (19) witnesses named in the charge-sheet, have been examined by the prosecution till date.

¶17

Signature Not Verified

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 10-Dec-2024 17:27:20

¶20

Mr. D. Mohanty, learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail of the Petitioner while submitting that, this Petitioner has ten (10) criminal antecedents relating to involvement in Naxal activities.

¶21

Perused the copies of the depositions of P.W.1 & 2, as produced by Mr. Rout, learned counsel for the Petitioner, in course of hearing.

¶22

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1693 has observed that, if the State or any prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution, then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Further in the case of Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement , 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1920 , the Hon’ble apex Court have observed as follows:-

¶23

“ 54. xxxxxxxxxx. In our view, keeping the appellant behind the bars for an unlimited period of time in the hope of speedy completion of trial would deprive his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. As observed time and again, the prolonged incarceration before being pronounced guilty of an offence should not be permitted to become punishment without trial .”

¶24

Upon hearing both the parties and considering the evidences of P.W.1 & 2 as well as the materials available against the Petitioner and further, his period of detention inside custody and

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 10-Dec-2024 17:27:20

¶28

taking note of the principles decided in the afore-cited cases, it is directed to release the Petitioner-Pusika Lachna@Kulesika on bail in connection with Bandhugaon P.S. Case No.30/2013 corresponding to C.T. Case No.06/2020 on such terms and conditions to be fixed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Koraput or the court in seisin over the matter as he deems just and proper including the condition that, the Petitioner shall furnish two sureties out of which one shall be his relative and that, he shall not be involved in any other offences while on bail.

¶29

The BLAPL is disposed of.

¶30

An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶31

( B.P. Routray) Judge

¶32

B.K. Barik

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

Page 3 of 3

¶35

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 10-Dec-2024 17:27:20

Pusika Lachna @ Kulesika v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pusika Lachna @ Kulesika 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sushil Kumar Pradhan Vs D.G. and I.G. of Police, Cuttack

Asif Abu Baker Vs Spa, Jeypore and Ors.

Prasan Kumar Parida Vs Orissa State Agriculture and Marketing Board

O.I.Co.Ltd Vs Suguna Patnaik

Debadutta Sarangi Vs State of Odisha

Dasarathi Sahoo Vs Nagendra K.Jena