Pratyush Kant Dash Vs State of Odisha

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State. Perused the case diary as well as documents annexed thereto.

¶16

This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the Petitioner for bail in connection with Jeypore Town P.S. Case No.236/2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 884/2023 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M. Jeypore, Dist- Koraput for alleged commission of offence under Sections 341,294,307,323,506,34 of I.P.C.

¶17

It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contended that some of the accused persons have been

¶18

Page 1 of 3.

¶19

discharged in the meantime. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that there are no materials on record to implicate the present petitioner in the present crime. On such grounds, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand objected to the release of the petitioner on bail on the ground that there are certain materials on record to indicate the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged crime. In course of his argument learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the statement of the deceased, which was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., wherein he has implicated the petitioner and has stated that the petitioner had repeatedly assaulted the deceased by means of a knife. He also referred to the statement of some of the witnesses like Abinash Palei and others who have also clearly implicated the present petitioner by alleging that the petitioner assaulted the deceased by means of a knife. On such ground learned counsel for the State opposed the release of the petitioner on bail at this stage.

¶21

On perusal of the record it appears that the medical examination report of the victim, at the initial stage, reveals that the deceased has sustained injuries on his abdomen and on his left elbow. It is a matter of fact that while undergoing treatment the deceased died in the hospital three days after the occurrence. Additionally, the post-mortem examination report issued by Andhra Medical College, Vishakhapatnam, where the petitioner was undergoing treatment, indicates that the injuries sustained by the victim are ante-mortem in nature. The injuries reflected in the postmortem report corroborate with the allegation made by the eye-

¶22

Page 2 of 3.

¶23

witnesses. Further, in the post-mortem examination report it has also been indicated that the injuries which have been found on the abdomen of the deceased, have been opined to have resulted from the use of a blunt object and sharp object with moderate to heavy force. The cause of death has been shown as shock due to blunt injury to the neck and penetrating injury over the chest and abdomen.

¶24

This Court, on a careful examination of the materials on record, further taking note of the statement of the witnesses recorded in course of investigation, is of the considered view that the allegation of the eye-witnesses corroborates with the medical examination report as well as post-mortem report. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail at this juncture.

¶25

8. Accordingly, The bail application stands rejected.

¶26

( A.K. Mohapatra )

¶27

Judge

¶28

Rubi

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Digitally Signed Page 3 of 3. Signed by: RUBI BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 19-Sep-2024 17:47:40