Dismissed

Mukta @ Mukuta @ Prakash Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC1 Oct 2024BLAPL/6942/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the bail application of an accused in a murder case, stating it is not inclined to entertain the matter at this stage. Liberty was granted to renew the prayer after examining specific material witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; liberty granted to renew prayer before lower court after examination of material witnesses.

Mukta @ Mukuta @ Prakash Pradhan Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No. 6942 of 2024

¶3

Mukta @ Mukuta @ …. Petitioner Prakash Pradhan

¶4

Mr. R.K. Pattanaik, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

…. Opposite Party

¶8

Mr. P.K. Mohanty, ASC

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

ORDER

01.10.2024

Order No.

02.

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶15

The Petitioner is an accused in connection with G.R. Case No.760 of 2023 pending on the file of learned N.G.N-cum-J.M.F.C., Tangi, arising out of Tangi P.S. Case No.774 of 2023 for commission of offence alleged under Sections 302/201/34 of IPC.

¶16

Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. case is pending in any other Court.

¶17

Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned 1^st Addl. Sessions Judge, Khurda by order dated 19.04.2024 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

¶18

Page 1 of 2

¶19

It is submitted that the Petitioner is in custody since 22.11.2023 and the allegation is based on circumstantial evidence and as charge sheet has already been filed in the meanwhile and the chain of circumstance is not complete qua the accusation vis-àvis the Petitioner, his further continuance in custody is not warranted.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and places reliance on the statement one Nityananda Sahoo-C.W.6 regarding the last seen theory and statement of Bikash Pradhan-C.W.10 and Niranjan Sahoo-C.W.11, who are witnesses to the statement recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.

¶21

Considering the materials on record, this Court is not inclined to entertain this bail application at this stage.

¶22

Liberty is granted to the Petitioner to renew his prayer before the learned Court in seisin after examination of material witnesses including Nityananda Sahoo-C.W.6, Bikash Pradhan-C.W.10 and Niranjan Sahoo-C.W.11.

¶23

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

¶24

(V. NARASINGH) Judge

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTOSHI LENKA Santoshi Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 03-Oct-2024 12:55:54

¶27

Page 2 of 2

Mukta @ Mukuta @ Prakash Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukta @ Mukuta @ Prakash Pradhan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sonu @ Sanuj Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Bunu Parida Vs State of Odisha

Madhu Harijan Vs State of Odisha

Kishore Jena @ Kishore Kumar Jena Vs State of Odisha

Digambra Majhi Vs State of Odisha

Sashikanta Mankar Vs State of Odisha