Allowed

Chinmaya Rout @ Chinu v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC21 Jan 2025BLAPL/430/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa allowed the bail application of the petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS. The court fixed a bond of Rs. 50,000 with sureties and imposed reporting conditions. The court cited the principle that bail is the rule and the co-accused was released on bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed bail on furnishing bonds of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties each, subject to conditions of appearance and reporting to police station.

Chinmaya Rout @ Chinu Vs State of Odisha — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.430 of 2025

¶2

Chinmaya Rout @ Chinu

¶3

Petitioner

¶4

Mr. A.S. Paul, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

Opposite Party

¶8

Mr. A. Pradhan, Addl. PP

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

ORDER(ORAL)

Order No. 01.

21.01.2025

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

¶14

This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Nayapalli P.S. Case No.648 of 2024 corresponding to C.T. Case No.1303 of 2024 pending in the file of learned J.M.F.C.-III, Bhubaneswar, for commission of offences punishable U/S.309(4) of BNS, on the allegation of snatching away the vanity bag containing Rs.5,000/- from the informant along with two coaccused persons.

¶15

Heard, Mr. Amlan Shakti Paul, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A. Pradhan, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor in the matter and perused the record.

¶16

After having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence as alleged against the petitioner vis-à-vis

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

the accusations sought to be brought against him and regard being had to the pre-trial detention of the petitioner in custody since 21.11.2024 with progress of investigation and following the well-recognized principle of “bail is the rule, but jail is the exception” and keeping in view the release of co-accused Nirakar Naik on bail in BLAPL No. 12870 of 2024, this Court without expressing any view, admits the petitioner to bail.

¶19

Hence, the bail application of the Petitioner stands allowed and the Petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions as deem fit and proper by it with following conditions:-

¶20

(i) the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail,

¶21

(ii) the petitioner in the course of trial shall attend the trial Court on each date of posting without fail unless his attendance is dispensed with . In case the Petitioner fails without sufficient cause to appear in the Court in accordance with the terms of the bail, the learned trial Court may proceed against the Petitioner for offence U/S.229-A of IPC in accordance with law and

¶22

(iii) the petitioner shall report attendance before the Jurisdictional Police Station once in a week preferably on Sunday of each month in between 10 A.M. to 12 Noon for three (03) months from the actual date of release from the custody.

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

The I.I.C. of Jurisdictional Police Station shall not detain the petitioner unnecessarily after recording his attendance beyond the time as stipulated.

¶25

It is clarified that the Court in seisin of the case will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner without further reference to this Court, if any of the above conditions are violated or a case for cancellation of bail is otherwise made out. In the wake of aforesaid, the subsequent involvement of the petitioner in future for grave/similar offence on prima facie accusations may be treated as a ground for cancellation of bail in this case.

¶26

Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. 7. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.

¶27

(G. Satapathy) Judge

¶28

S. Sasmal

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 22-Jan-2025 11:08:08

¶31

Page 3 of 3

Chinmaya Rout @ Chinu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinmaya Rout @ Chinu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Santosh Kumar Rath Vs State of Odisha (Opid)

Dambarudhara Khilla Vs State of Odisha

Satya Prakash @ Bubun Rout Vs State of Odisha

Bidyadhar Behera Vs Haripriya Behera

Sunil Tafali Vs Pratima Tafali@ Mandal