Allowed¶19

Arun Kumar Khadanga v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC11 Jan 2024BLAPL/6671/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Orissa, BLAPL No.6671 of 2023, order dated 11.01.2024, D. Dash, J. — Arun Kumar Khadanga v. State of Odisha. Bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in S.T. Case No.141 of 2014 (Khurda Sadar P.S. Case No.21 of 2014) for offences under Sections 498-A, 302, 304B, 406, 109, 34 IPC; custody since 12.05.2014; trial midway; witnesses not supporting prosecution; bail granted with conditions of appearance and non-tampering/intimidation; violation entails cancellation.

What did the court decide?

Release of the Petitioner on bail in S.T. Case No.141 of 2014 on terms and conditions deemed just and proper by the Court in seisin of the case, with conditions of personal appearance on each date of posting and abstention from threatening or terrorizing prosecution witnesses; violation to entail cancellation of bail. ¶19

Arun Kumar Khadanga Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioner, in custody since 12.05.2014 in S.T. Case No.141 of 2014 (Khurda Sadar P.S. Case No.21 of 2014) for offences under Sections 498-A/302/304B/406/109/34 IPC, should be released on bail on reconsideration of his successive application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Court's answer

Taking into account the submissions, materials on record, the period of detention in custody and the snail's pace of the ongoing trial, the Petitioner is to be released on bail in S.T. Case No.141 of 2014 on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the Court in seisin of the case.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Bail is subject to further conditions that the Petitioner will appear in person before the Court in seisin of the case on each date of posting without fail and will not threaten or terrorize the prosecution witnesses in any manner; violation of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Successive application under S.439 Cr.P.C. — Petitioner in custody since 12.05.2014 in Khurda Sadar P.S. Case No.21 of 2014 / S.T. Case No.141 of 2014 (Ss.498-A/302/304B/406/109/34 IPC) pending before the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Khurda — Trial at midway; some important witnesses not supporting the prosecution case; State did not dispute custody since 12.05.2014 — Period of detention and snail's pace of trial weighed in favour of release — Bail granted on terms fixed by the trial Court, with conditions of personal appearance on every posting date and non-intimidation of prosecution witnesses — Violation to entail cancellation of bail — BLAPL disposed of accordingly (D. Dash, J.).

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL NO.6671 OF 2023

¶3

Arun Kumar Khadanga …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. M.K. Chand, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opposite Party Mr.P.K. Mohanty, ASC.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

MR. JUSTICE D.DASH ORDER

Order No.

11.01.2024

The matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement (virtual/physical) mode.

¶14

This is the successive journey of the Petitioner, who is in custody in connection with Khurda Sadar P.S. Case No.21 of 2014 corresponding to S.T. Case No.141 of 2014, pending on the file of learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Khurda, running for commission of offence under section498-A/302/304B/406/109/34 of the IPC, in filing this application under section439 of the Cr.P.C., for reconsideration of the prayer for grant of bail to the Petitioner in the above mentioned case.

¶15

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that this Petitioner being arrested in the case on 12.05.2014 is languishing in custody since then and the trial in the meantime has just arrived at the midway. It is also submitted that during trial some important witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. He therefore submits that for the detention of the Petitioner in custody, the suffering is not only to him but also the other family members who are dependents upon him. He further submits that the Petitioner being a permanent resident of the District of Khurda, there remains no scope on his part to flee from justice and the question of tampering the evidence in the facts and

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

// 2 //

¶18

circumstances does not arise. In view of all these above, he urges for reconsideration of the prayer for grant of bail to the Petitioner. 4. Learned Counsel for the State opposes the move in view of the evidence available against the Petitioner. He however does not dispute the position that the Petitioner is in custody since 12.05.2014.

¶19

Taking into account the submissions made; further keeping in view the materials on records as those stand against the Petitioner as also the surrounding circumstances including the period of detention of the Petitioner in custody; when the trial is still going on at a snail’s pace; while being inclined to reconsider the prayer for grant bail to the Petitioner in the aforesaid case, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the Court in seisin of the case with further conditions that: -

¶20