Manas Kumar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.3967 of 2024

Amitav Mishra …. Petitioner Ms. D. Nanda, Advocate -VersusState of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. P.K. Mohanty, AGA BLAPL No.2296 of 2024 Manas Kumar Sahoo …. Petitioner Ms. D. Nanda, Advocate -VersusState of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. P.K. Mohanty, AGA And

¶3

BLAPL No.11091 of 2024

¶4

B.K. Bisheswar Sadangi @ Akash …. Petitioner Mr. D. Panda, Advocate -VersusState of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. P.K. Mohanty, AGA

¶5

CORAM:

¶6

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

¶7

ORDER

¶8

07.01.2025

¶9

Order No. 1. The bail petitions since arise out of Nuagaon P.S. Case No.247 of 2022, the same are disposed of by the following common order.

¶10

¶11

Page 1 of 4

¶12

Heard Ms. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioners in BLAPL Nos.3967 of 1024 & 2296 of 2024 and Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No.11091 of 2024 besides Mr. Mohanty, learned ASC for the State.

¶13

Instant petitions under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are filed for release of the petitioners on bail in connection with C.T. Case Nos.323 of 2023 in BLAPL Nos.3967 of 1024 & 2296 of 2024 and C.T. Case No.214 of 2024 in BLAPL No.11091 of 2024 respectively pending in the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jagatsinghpur corresponding to Nuagaon P.S. Case No.247 of 2022 on the grounds stated therein.

¶14

It is submitted to the Court by Mr. Panda, learned counsel for one of the petitioners that the said accused has been implicated on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused, namely, Amitav Mishra. It is further submitted that unidentified body was recovered and as such, no post-mortem and D.N.A. examination was held in respect thereof to confirm the same as of the deceased. It is further submitted that the alleged occurrence is of the year 2022. It is the submission that a missing report was lodged and thereafter, investigation was commenced, during and in course of which, merely on the basis of an exculpatory statement of accused Amitav Mishra, arrest of the petitioners has been made. In support of the contention advanced, Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the statement of accused, namely, Amitav Mishra recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

¶15

Ms. Nanda, learned counsel for other two petitioners submits that in absence of concrete evidence to implicate the accused persons, both of them are also to be released on bail like the co-accused, namely, Santosh Lima.

¶16

Page 2 of 4

¶17

On the other hand, Mr. Mohanty, learned ASC for the State objects to the release of the petitioners on bail in view of evidence collected and recovery of the weapon of offence and the statement of the co-accused recorded under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. Such recovery of weapon of offence is corroborated by two independent witnesses, it is further submitted by Mr. Mohanty, learned ASC that involvement of the petitioners is prima facie established, hence, they should not be enlarged on bail.

¶18

In course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court by Ms. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioners that the trial has commenced in respect of accused, namely, Santosh Lima and as further informed by Mr. Panda, learned counsel that as against the accused he represents, trial is fixed to 30^th & 31^st January, 2025.

¶19

Perused the statement of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and also that of the co-accused, namely, Amitav Mishra. The details of the circumstances leading to the disappearance of the deceased have been narrated by the accused above named. The involvement of the accused persons has been disclosed by the said accused. In fact, such is the confession of the accused above named before the police describing the manner in which the deceased was subjected to and thus, the arrests have been made on such confessional statement of the accused, namely, Amitav Mishra. No direct evidence could be shown to suggest the involvement of the petitioners. Of course, a lathi has been seized on the basis of the disclosure made by one of the accused persons but such recovery is almost after one year of the missing report being lodged. It is not disputed by Mr. Mohanty, learned ASC for the State that the dead body, which was recovered, was ever suggested to D.N.A. and post-mortem examination. According to Mr. Panda, learned counsel, the body recovered was not properly identified.

¶20

Page 3 of 4

¶21

Ms. Nanda, learned counsel submits that no D.N.A. and postmortem examination was held either against the dead body.

¶22

Considering the above facts and absence of any direct evidence and the fact that trial has started in respect of two of the petitioners and that during trial, the informant has been examined from the side of the prosecution and the entire evidence apparently is based on the confessional statement of accused, namely, Amitav Mishra, this Court is of the view that the petitioners who are in custody since the dates of arrests should be released on bail subject to the following conditions.

¶23

Hence, it is ordered.

¶24

In the result, petitions under Section 439 Cr.P.C. stand allowed. Consequently, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail in connection with C.T. Case Nos.323 of 2023 in BLAPL Nos.3967 of 1024 & 2296 of 2024 and C.T. Case No.214 of 2024 in BLAPL No.11091 of 2024 respectively corresponding to Nuagaon P.S. Case No.247 of 2022 subject to them furnishing bail bonds of Rs.40,000/-(Rupees forty thousand) each with one solvent surety each for the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jagatsinghpur, who shall be at liberty to impose such other suitable conditions as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances. It is made clear that the conclusion as above is limited to and while considering release of the petitioners and in no way to influence learned court below during the trial.

¶25

12. BLAPLs stand disposed of.

¶26

13. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed Signed by: ALOK RANJAN SETHYDesignation: Asst. Registrar-Cum-Senior Secretary (R.K. Pattanaik) Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Judge Date: 08-Jan-2025 11:19:08Alok

¶29

Page 4 of 4

Manas Kumar Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manas Kumar Sahoo v. State of Odisha

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

Baruna @ Basanta Gouda Vs State of Odisha

Ramkumar Singh Vs State of Odisha

Sukura @ Sikra Munda Vs State of Odisha

Amitav Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Kishan Majhi@Banti Vs State of Odisha

Jayanti Jena Vs State of Odisha