Allowed

Bala Naik @ Ajaya Naik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC20 Dec 2024BLAPL/9245/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 483 BNSS in a 2010 kidnapping case where chargesheet was filed in 2019 and the petitioner had been in custody since July 2024 after arrest on warrant. Noting the FIR was lodged two months after the incident and the victim was not a minor, the court allowed bail with conditions.

What the court decided

AI extract

Bala Naik @ Ajaya Naik Vs State of Odisha — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No.9245 of 2024

¶3

Bala Naik @ Ajaya Naik

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. P.K.Samal, Advocate

-Versus-

State of Odisha

…. Opposite party

Mr. R.Pradhan,ASC

CORAM:

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

20.12.2024

Order No.

Heard Mr. Samal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pradhan, ASC for the State.

¶17

Instant petition under Section 483 B.N.N.S. is filed by the petitioner for release of the petitioner on bail in connection with C.T. Case No.583 of 2010 arising out of Athagarh P.S. Case No.229 of 2010 pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M., Athagarh on the grounds stated.

¶18

Mr. Samal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the report was lodged almost two months later from the date of incident after the victim was rescued and in so far as the allegation of kidnapping is concerned, the same is a falsehood. It is submitted that the victim is married since long. Considering the fact that the alleged occurrence is of the year 2010 and in the meantime, more than 14 years have gone by and the chargesheet was filed in 2019 with the custody of the petitioner since 6^th July, 2024, it is further submitted

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

that he should be allowed to go on bail subject to any terms and conditions as would be imposed by the Court but the same is strongly objected to by Mr. Pradhan, learned ASC for the State by alleging that the victim was subjected to forcible sexual relationship so revealed from her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and while claiming so, he refers to a copy of the said statement produced in Court today along with the Case Diary and other police papers.

¶21

Gone through the contents of the F.I.R. as at Annexure-1. The incident is of the year 2010. Admittedly, two months after the occurrence, the F.I.R. was lodged and the same is after the victim was rescued. From the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C., it is made to understand that she was taken by the petitioner and had to stay with him for about two months at Bhubaneswar. The details of the events which have taken place after the alleged incident have been narrated by the victim in her above statement. The investigation is concluded with the chargesheet filed in 2019 as informed to the Court by Mr. Pradhan, learned ASC for the State. In fact, on the strength of the warrant of arrest, the petitioner was apprehended and he is in custody since the month of July, 2024. The Court finds that the petitioner is alleged of having kidnapped the victim by then aged about 18 to 20 years and admittedly, not a minor and both stayed at different places and though, she alleged of being subjected to forcible physical relationship. Considering the above facts and the pendency of case since 2010 with the chargesheet filed in 2019 the fact that on the basis of an NBW/A, the petitioner was arrested and in custody, the Court is inclined to release him on bail subject to following conditions.

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

5. Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶24

In the result, the petition under Section 483 B.N.N.S. stands allowed. Consequently, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with in connection with C.T. Case No.583 of 2010 arising out of Athagarh P.S. Case No.229 of 2010 subject to him furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/-(rupees forty thousand) with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Athagarh, who is at liberty to impose such other suitable conditions as deemed necessary besides the following, such as, he shall attend the court below on each date of posting till the trial is concluded.

¶25

The BLAPL is disposed of.

¶26

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.

¶27

(R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

¶28

kabita

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Digitally Signed Signed by: KABITARANI MAJHI Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CU TTACK Date: 21-Dec-2024 12:24:01

¶31

Page 3 of 3

Bala Naik @ Ajaya Naik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Bala Naik @ Ajaya Naik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Padmalochan Nandi Vs State of Odisha

Dharmendra Nayak @ Harijan Vs State of Odisha

Tanu @ Tanmaya Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Bijay Kumar Dey Vs State of Odisha

Ratnakar Behera Vs State of Odisha

Papuni @ Bijaya Kumar Barik @ Bijaya Barik Vs State of Odisha