Janaki Das @ Janaki Nayak Vs Amarabati Das

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

BLAPL No.6533 of 2024

Lachhman Das …. Petitioner Mr. P. Mohapatra, Advocate -VersusState of Orissa …. Opposite Party Mr. R. Pradhan, ASC BLAPL No.6254 of 2024 Biswanath Nial …. Petitioner Mr. S. Dwibedi, Advocate -VersusState of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. R. Pradhan, ASC And BLAPL No.6501 of 2024

¶4

Jogindra Bariha …. Petitioners

¶5

Mr. C. Samantaray, Advocate -VersusState of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. R. Pradhan, ASC CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK ORDER Order 09.01.2025 No. 05. 1. The bail petitions stand disposed of by the following common order.

¶6

Page 1 of 4

¶7

Recorded the submissions of learned counsel for the respective petitioners and State.

¶8

Instant petitions under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are filed for release of the petitioners on bail in connection with S.C. Case No.11 of 2024 pending in the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patnagarh corresponding to Khaprakhol P.S. Case No.260 of 2023 on the grounds stated.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsels for the petitioners that the alleged incident took place at the spur of the moment and it was while one of the accused persons was purchasing liquor from the shop of the informant. It is submitted that there was exchange of hot words and assault and counter assault and on account of the injuries received by the deceased, an employee of the said shop, he succumbed to the same thereafter. It is submitted that the assault to the deceased was at the instance of one of the petitioners. Considering the circumstances under which the alleged occurrence took place, it is finally submitted that investigation since concluded in the meantime with the chargesheet being filled, a copy of which is at Annexure-2, the accused persons, who are in custody from 3^rd December, 2023 should be allowed to go on bail on any terms and conditions.

¶10

Mr. Pradhan, learned ASC for the State, on the other hand, objects to the release of the accused persons on bail for the alleged mischief committed by them leading to the death of the deceased and that apart, the weapon of offence was recovered with the statement under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act on record.

¶11

Perused the FIR i.e. Annexure-1. The chargesheet is at Annexure-2 and the same is also perused. From the statement of the

¶12

Page 2 of 4

¶13

witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the Court finds that the petitioners did the mischief at the shop of the informant and assaulted the deceased, who received injuries on his head and other parts. A copy of the PM report is made available in respect of the deceased and the cause of death therein is stated to be on account of head injuries and complications arising therefrom. The occurrence has taken place on 3^rd December, 2023 and a day after, the deceased died. It is claimed that the petitioners do not have any other criminal antecedents. Admittedly, the petitioners gathered near the shop and combinedly assaulted the informant and the deceased and it was under the peculiar circumstances narrated in the FIR and as also revealed by the witnesses, whose statements have been recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. It may be said that the petitioners suddenly out of anger, since there was exchange of hot words between both the sides, picked up the weapon of offence and attacked the informant besides the deceased, who received the injuries as a result and died on the next day i.e. on 4^th December, 2023. It may also be said that there was no pre-plan, rather, everything happened suddenly and though, the petitioners alleged to have committed the overt acts and it has taken life of an employee of the shop leading to the unfortunate incident taking place, the Court is of the view that with the closure of investigation and for none of them having criminal antecedent, they should be allowed to go on bail subject to following conditions.

¶14

7. Hence, it is ordered.

¶15

In the result, the petitions under Section 439 Cr.P.C. stand allowed. Consequently, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail in connection with S.C. Case No.11 of 2024 arising out of Khaprakhol P.S. Case No.260 of 2023 subject to them furnishing bail bonds of Rs.40,000/-(rupees forty thousand) each with one

¶16

Page 3 of 4

¶17

TUDU

¶18

solvent surety for the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patnagarh, who shall be at liberty to impose such other suitable conditions besides the following, such as, they shall not influence the material witnesses and tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever, while on bail.

¶19

The BLAPLs are disposed of.

¶20

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

¶21

(R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

Digitally Signed Signed by: THAKURDAS TUDU Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: OHC,CTC Date: 10-Jan-2025 11:37:34

¶24

Page 4 of 4

Janaki Das @ Janaki Nayak v. Amarabati Das

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Janaki Das @ Janaki Nayak v. Amarabati Das

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union of India Vs Land Acquisition Officer,Khurda Road

The L.a.O.,B.Patna Vs Tikeram Majhi

Kadambini Moharana Vs Sukanta Ku.Moharana

State of Orissa Vs Gopi Patra

State Vs Mandardhar Nayak

Manorama Chand@Seanju Vs Ranajit Ku.Chand