The appellant's bail application, rejected by the trial court, was dismissed by the High Court. While refusing bail, the Court directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings and conclude the trial within six months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.1113 of 2023
Binod @ Srimanta Rana
Appellant
Mr. A. S. Paul, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & another
…. Respondents
Mr. Priyabrata Tripathy, Addl. Standing Counsel
Order No.
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
27.02.2024
This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode). Learned counsel for the State submitted that the notice on the respondent no.2/informant has been made sufficient.
None appears for the respondent no.2/informant. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.
This is an appeal under section 14(A) of S.C. & S.T. (PoA) Act in connection with T.R. Case No.448 of 2022 arising out of Khordha Sadar P.S. Case No.199 of 2022 pending in the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO) -cumAddl. Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar for offences punishable under sections
// 2 //
376(2)(n)/323/506 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 6(1)of POCSO Act read with section 3(2)(v)(va) of the S.C. & S.T. (PoA) Act read with sections 67(A) & 67(B) of I.T. Act, 2008.
The appellant moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO) -cum- Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar which was rejected on 08.09.2023.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is in judicial custody since 18.10.2022 and he has been chargesheeted under sections 376(2)(n)/323/506/294 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 6(1)of POCSO Act read with sections 3(1)(r)(s)(wi) & 3(2)(va) of the S.C. & S.T. (PoA) Act. He further submitted that the victim is already examined as P.W.1 in the learned trial Court and at this stage, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence, and therefore, the bail application may be favourably considered.
Learned counsel for the State on the other hand placed the evidence of the victim and submitted that she was a minor girl and the appellant is a married person and he took nude photographs of the victim administering stupefying substances to her and blackmailed the victim and kept physical relationship with her, and therefore, the appellant should not be released on bail.
Page 2 of 3
// 3 //
Perused the evidence of the witnesses examined so far in the learned trial Court.
In view of the materials available on record, particularly, the evidence of the victim, while not inclining to release the appellant on bail, I direct the learned trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
The CRLA stands disposed of.
A copy of this order be communicated to the
learned trial Court for compliance.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
M.K.Rout
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: MANOJ KUMAR ROUT Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 01-Mar-2024 16:42:26
Page 3 of 3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellant is entitled to bail in a POCSO and SC/ST Act case given he has been in custody since 2022 and chargesheeted?
5 provisions across 4 enactments
Binod @ Srimanta Rana
State of Odisha
another
S.K. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
