Subal Behera Vs State of Odisha

This order arises out of an application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the Petitioner Subal Behera in connection with Satyabadi P.S. case No.114/2019, corresponding to T.R Case No.3/02/2020, arising out of G.R. Case No.1267/2019 pending in the file of learned 2^nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Puri for alleged commission of offence under Sections 147/148/341/302/120-B/149 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 25/27 of the Arms Act.

¶15

This is a case of triple murder.

¶16

It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that he is inside custody since 17^th July, 2019 and till date trial is still pending where only 23 witnesses out of 36 charge-sheet named witnesses have been examined.

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

It is further submitted that this Petitioner did not play any active role in commission of the offences.

¶19

Mr. Das, learned ASC opposes the prayer for bail.

¶20

With regard to delay in trial, this court by order dated 5^th July, 2024 directed learned trial court to submit a report with regard to stage of trial and the reasons for delay. The learned trial judge in his letter dated 20^th July, 2024 has stated that due to delayed attendance of the independent witnesses and none attendance of official witnesses despite several steps taken by the court, the trial was delayed.

¶21

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2024 SCC on-Line 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 , (SLP (Crl.) No.8781 of 2024) decided on 9^th August, 2024, Hon’ble Apex Court have observed as follows:-

¶22

“ 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 .”

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

Generally this court does not grant bail in such heinous crime. But keeping in view the period of detention of the Petitioner inside custody pending trial and the delay in completion of trial, as well as the law settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases aforesaid, it is directed to release the Petitioner on bail in the above mentioned case on such terms and conditions as may be deemed just and proper by the learned court in seisin over the matter including the condition that the Petitioner shall attend the trial court on each date fixed.

¶25

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶26

An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.

¶27

M.K. Panda

¶28

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Page 3 of 3

¶30

Digitally Signed Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack Date: 14-Aug-2024 14:00:56

Subal Behera v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subal Behera 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D.M., Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Bbsr Vs Sarat Kumar Sahu

G. Lachhami Vs M. Soma

Ch. Kamalu Vs M. Soma

Uttam Panigrahi Vs State of Odisha

Prakash Chandra Pradhan Vs the Tahasildar, Bbsr

Sisir Kumar Samal Vs State of Odisha