Allowed

Arabinda Jena @ Nalu v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC23 Aug 2024BLAPL/7844/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa granted regular bail to four petitioners in a case involving offences under the IPC and P.D.P.P. Act, subject to a bail bond, cash security deposit, and conditions regarding the verification of criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a bond of Rs.25,000, cash security deposits, and conditions subject to verification of criminal antecedents.

Arabinda Jena @ Nalu Vs State of Odisha — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.7844 of 2024

¶2

1) Arabinda Jena @ Nalu ..... Petitioners 2) Bhagaban Behera @ Mahani Represented By Adv. – Mr. Gopinath Mishra 3) Alok Kumar Pradhan @ Chema

¶3

4) Prakash Rout @ Bumba

¶4

-versus-

¶5

State Of Odisha

¶6

..... Opposite Party Represented By Adv. – Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

¶9

ORDER

¶10

Order No. 23.08.2024

¶11

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

¶12

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the StateOpposite Party. Perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶13

The present bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioners for regular bail in connection with G.R. Case No.195 of 2024, arising out of Maniabandha P.S. Case No.73 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C, Baramba for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 120-B/452/294/ 323/ 307/332/353/427/336/506/ 34 of IPC read with Section-3 of P.D.P.P. Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that earlier this

¶15

Page 1 of 3.

¶16

matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that the Petitioners are in custody since 05.06.2024. He further contended that in the meantime the investigation has progressed substantially. He further contended that the injured has not sustained any injury at all. He further contended that the Petitioner No.1 is having three criminal antecedents and Petitioner No.2 is having two criminal antecedents and they belong to the locality, therefore, there is no chance of absconding. In such view of the matter learned counsel for the Petitioners contended the Petitioners be released on bail on such terms and conditions as this Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶17

Learned Additional Standing Counsel on the other hand opposed the bail application of the Petitioners on the ground that the investigation is still on. Therefore, on such ground, learned counsel for the State submitted that the bail application of the Petitioners be rejected at this juncture.

¶18

Having heard learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful consideration of the surrounding facts as well as materials on record, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioners on bail subject to imposition of stringent conditions.

¶19

Hence, it is directed that the Petitioners be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twenty Five thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in

¶20

Page 2 of 3.

¶21

seisin over the matter. 8. It is open for the Court in seisin over the matter to impose any other conditions as may be deemed just and proper. Violation of any other conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail application.

¶22

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioners is subject to depositing a cash security of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) by the Petitioner No.1 and Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) each by the Petitioners No.2 to 4 before the Court in seisin over the matter, which shall be kept in any Nationalized Bank in interest bearing account initially for a period of one year which will be renewable from time to time till conclusion of trial and the same shall be abide by the final outcome of the trial of the case.

¶23

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioners be subject to the condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the Petitioners. In the event it is found that the Petitioner No.1 is having more than ten criminal antecedents, then this order shall not be given effect to in respect of Petitioner No.1. In the event it is found that the Petitioners No.2, 3 and 4 is having more than six criminal antecedents, then this order shall not be given effect to in respect of Petitioners No.2, 3 and 4.

¶24

The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶25

( A.K. Mohapatra) Signature Not Verified Judge

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Reason: Authentication Debasis Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 26-Aug-2024 15:35:31

¶27

Page 3 of 3.

Arabinda Jena @ Nalu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arabinda Jena @ Nalu 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

Budhu Roy Vs State of Odisha

Antarjami Meher Vs State of Odisha

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of Odisha

Premranjan Oram@Dilu Vs State of Odisha

Srikanta Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Pradipta Kumar Sethi Vs State of Odisha