Dismissed¶16

Krushna Meher v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC11 Aug 2025BLAPL/182/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court (Cuttack), Judge G. Satapathy, oral order 11.08.2025: bail applications BLAPL Nos. 182, 1360 & 2071 of 2025 (Krushna Meher, Rohit Sa, Nitai Kara @ Nitai Charan Kara) under S.483 BNSS for offences under S.302 IPC - murder of police constable Shankar Bhanu Behera allegedly to take his diamond stone (Balangir Town P.S. Case No.388 of 2024 / G.R. Case No.1037 of 2024, S.D.J.M. Balangir); co-accused-statement/inadmissibility argument rejected as case cracked on CCTV and CDR surveillance; bail denied, trial yet to commence; applications rejected and disposed of.

What did the court decide?

On careful scrutiny of the entire materials placed on record, contrary to the petitioners' contention of implication through an inadmissible co-accused statement, the Court found that the case was cracked on the basis of CCTV and CDR surveillance.

Krushna Meher Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioners under S.483 BNSS in connection with Balangir Town P.S. Case No.388 of 2024 / G.R. Case No.1037 of 2024 involving offences punishable under S.302 IPC. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences alleged against the petitioners vis-a-vis the allegations brought against them, the materials collected in support thereof, the circumstance that the deceased was found murdered in the hotel, the roles alleged against the petitioners, the other circumstances on record including the impact of the crime on society, and that the trial was yet to commence, this Court was not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail refused - murder of police constable for diamond stone; case cracked on CCTV and CDR surveillance. Three applications under S.483 BNSS (BLAPL Nos. 182, 1360 & 2071 of 2025) by Krushna Meher, Rohit Sa and Nitai Kara @ Nitai Charan Kara sought bail in Balangir Town P.S. Case No.388 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1037 of 2024 (learned S.D.J.M., Balangir) for offences punishable under S.302 IPC, the main allegation being murder of police constable Shankar Bhanu Behera to take away the diamond stone from him. Counsel for the petitioners argued that implication rested solely on a co-accused statement inadmissible in the eye of law; the Court found on careful scrutiny that the case was cracked on CCTV and CDR surveillance, and considering the nature and gravity of the offences, the materials collected, the circumstance of the hotel murder, the alleged roles, the impact of the crime on society and that the trial was yet to commence, declined bail. The bail applications stood rejected and the BLAPLs stood disposed of by common oral order dated 11.08.2025 (G. Satapathy, J.).

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

Krushna Meher (In BLAPL No.182 of 2025) Rohit Sa (In BLAPL No.1360 of 2025) Nitai Kara @ Nitai Charan Kara (In BLAPL No.2071 of 2025) … Petitioners

¶3

Mr. B.P. Rath, Advocate (in BLAPL No.182 of 2025) Mr. H.S. Mishra, Advocate (in BLAPL No.1360 of 2025) Mr. A.K. Saa, Advocate (in BLAPL No.2071 of 2025) -versus-

¶4

State of Odisha

¶5

… Opposite Party Mr. P. Satpathy, Addl. PP Mr. J.K. Panda, Advocate (Informant)

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

Order No. 07.

¶8

JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL) 11.08.2025

¶9

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

¶10

Since these three bail applications arise out of one and same case record, the same are heard together and disposed of by this common order with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. These are applications U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Balangir Town P.S. Case No.388 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1037 of 2024 pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M., Balangir, for commission of offences punishable U/S.302 of IPC, on Page 1 of 3

¶11

the main allegation of committing murder of one Shankar Bhanu Behera, a police constable to take away the diamond stone from him.

¶12

Heard, Mr. Bhagabat Prasad Rath, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No. 182 of 2025; Mr. Himanshu Sekhar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No. 1360 of 2025; Mr. Amit Kumar Saa, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No. 2071 of 2025; Jugala Kishore Panda, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. P. Satpathy, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor in these matters and perused the record.

¶13

The main plank of submission as advanced for the petitioners is that since the petitioners are implicated in this case on the basis of statement of co-accused which is inadmissible in the eye of law, the petitioners should be granted bail, but on a careful scrutiny of the entire materials placed on record, it reveals that the above case is cracked on the basis of CCTV and CDR surveillance. In such view of the matter and after having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioners vis-à-vis the allegation sought to be brought against them and the materials collected in support thereof and keeping in view the circumstance under which the deceased was found murdered in the hotel and the role as alleged against the petitioners

¶14

Page 2 of 3

¶15

and taking into account the other circumstances on record in entirety including the impact of crime on the society, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage, especially when the trial is yet to commence.

¶16

Hence, the bail applications of the petitioners Krushna Meher, Rohit Sa and Nitai Kara @ Nitai Charan Kara stand rejected. Accordingly, these BLAPL Nos. 182, 1360 & 2071 of 2025 stand disposed of. 7. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.

¶17

(G. Satapathy) Judge

¶18

S.Sasmal

¶19

Signature Not Verified

¶20

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 13-Aug-2025 11:41:09

¶21

Page 3 of 3

Krushna Meher v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krushna Meher v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Behera Vs State of Odisha

Raja Pattnayak Vs State of Odisha

Saroj Behera Vs State of Odisha

Binod Samal @ Aju Vs State of Odisha

Raghu Muduli Vs State of Odisha

Shyama Khilla Vs State of Odisha