Allowed

Sastha Nayak v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC6 Feb 2024BLAPL/7205/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa allowed bail applications for petitioners accused of murder. Petitioner No.2's application was disposed of as not pressed. Bail was granted with conditions including attendance, no departure from jurisdiction, and police reporting.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners Nos.1, 3-7 allowed on bail with bonds of Rs.50,000 each and two sureties; specific attendance and non-fugitive conditions imposed.

Sastha Nayak Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.7205 of 2023

¶2

Sastha Nayak and others

¶3

Petitioners

¶4

Mr. J. Sahoo, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

… Opposite Party

¶8

Mr. P.K. Mohanty, ASC

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

¶10

ORDER(ORAL) 06.02.2024

¶11

Order No.

¶12

05.

¶13

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

¶14

Mr. J. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioners by filing a memo in the Court today which is taken on record, prays to not press the bail application of the petitioner No.2-Arjun Dungri @ Dongri @ Ganda. Accordingly, the bail application of petitioner No.2 stands disposed of as not pressed. The present bail application is only confined to the petitioner No.1-Sastha Nayak, petitioner No.3Rajendra Netam, petitioner No.4-Karna Majhi, petitioner No.5- Benudhar Majhi, petitioner No.6Upabana Majhi @ Budu Majhi and petitioner No.7Rabindra Bagh @ Recha.

¶15

Page 1 of 4

¶16

This is a bail application U/S.439 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner Nos.1 and 3-7 for grant of bail arising out of Chandahandi P.S. Case No.18 of 2023 corresponding to C.T. Case No.76 of 2023 pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Umerkote for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302/34, on the allegation of committing murder of deceased-Sankar Bagh along with co-accused persons in furtherance of their common intention. 3. Heard, Mr. J. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner Nos.1 and 3-7 and Mr. P.K. Mohanty, learned ASC in the matter and perused the record. 4. After having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of offence as alleged against petitioner Nos.1 and 3 to 7, so also the accusations sought to be brought against them and on going through the materials placed on record including the statement of the so called eye witness-Tapan Bagh and the allegation of assault on the deceased being directed against coaccused Tulasi Pari, Nilakantha Nayak, Gajindra Katar and Arjun Dungri @ Dongri @ Ganda , who are not seeking bail in this case and taking into account the pre-trial detention of the Petitioner Nos.1 and 3-7 in custody, this Court admits the petitioner No.1-Sastha Nayak, petitioner No.3-Rajendra Netam, petitioner No.4-Karna Majhi, petitioner No.5- Benudhar Majhi,

¶17

Page 2 of 4

¶18

petitioner No.6-Upabana Majhi @ Budu Majhi and petitioner No.7-Rabindra Bagh @ Recha to bail.

¶19

Hence, the bail application of each of the petitioners stand allowed and the petitioner Nos.1 and 3 to 7 are allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it with following conditions:-

¶20

(i) the petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail,

¶21

(ii) the petitioners in the course of trial shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless their attendance is dispensed with. In case the Petitioners fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioners for offence U/S.229-A of IPC in accordance with law and

¶22

(iii) the petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till disposal of the case by giving their present address of stay and

¶23

(iv) the petitioners shall report attendance before the jurisdictional Police Station once in a fortnight preferably on 2^nd Sunday of each month in between 10 A.M. to 12 Noon for three(03) months from the actual date of their release from the custody.

¶24

Page 3 of 4

¶25

The I.I.C. of Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the petitioner Nos.1 and 3-7 unnecessarily after recording their attendance beyond the time as stipulated.

¶26

It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioners without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the petitioners in future for grave/similar type of offence on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case.

¶27

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. 7. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.

¶28

(G. Satapathy)
Judge

¶29

S. Sasmal

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Feb-2024 11:27:23

¶32

Page 4 of 4

Sastha Nayak v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sastha Nayak 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

Sumitra Sahoo Vs Umesh Chandra Sahoo

Pradip Ku.Pattnaik Vs State

Dibakar Sethi Vs State

Abhishek Mohanta Vs State of Odisha

Akshay @ Akshya Kumar Tiwari Vs State of Odisha

Narasingh Toika Vs State of Odisha