Babu @ Mahesh Mahakud Vs State of Odisha

This is an application under section 483 of B.N.S.S. in connection with Joda P.S. Case No.47 of 2022 corresponding G.R. Case No.179-A of 2022 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Barbil for alleged commission of offences under sections 341/323/302/447/342/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

Digitally SignedSigned by: SIPUN BEHERADesignation: Senior StenographerReason: AuthenticationLocation: HIGH COURT OFORISSA, CUTTACKDate: 14-May-2025 19:42:34

¶19

The prayer for bail of the petitioners has been rejected by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Champua vide order dated 11.04.2025.

¶20

Signature Not Verified

¶21

Page 1 of 4

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have voluntarily surrendered before the learned J.M.F.C., Barbil on 27.03.2025 and since then, they are in judicial custody and in the meantime, charge sheet has already been submitted for the offences under sections 341/323/302/447/ 342/34 of the Indian Penal Code and the occurrence in question took place on 19.03.2022 and as per the eye witness account of Babu Karua, it was the deceased, who first assaulted the petitioner Manoj Mahakud by means of knife on his neck on 19.03.2022 for which, the petitioner fled away. Learned counsel further submitted that on the very day, in the night about 10.00 to 11.00 p.m., the petitioners along with others assaulted the deceased by means of a lathi and on the next day, the deceased died. Learned counsel argued that one of the co-accused Sana @ Sishir Chandra Swain, who has been named as one of the assailants of the deceased by the aforesaid eye witness, faced trial in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Champua in S.T. Case No.51 of 2022 and vide judgment and order dated 18.03.2025, he has been acquitted. Learned counsel further argued that in view of available material on record and the background of the case, the bail application of the petitioners may be favourably considered.

¶23

Page 2 of 4

¶24

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposed the prayer for bail and produced the case diary and post mortem report and submitted that both the petitioners were absconders for about three years and therefore, they should not be enlarged on bail.

¶25

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of accusation against the petitioners, the circumstances under which the offence stated to have been taken place, the nature of overt act attributed against the petitioners and taking into account the period of detention of the petitioners in judicial custody, I am inclined to release the petitioners on bail.

¶26

Let the petitioners be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) each with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin over the matter with further conditions as the learned Court below may deem just and proper including the conditions that the petitioners shall not indulge in any criminal activities and shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date to which the case would be posted for trial.

¶27

Page 3 of 4

¶28

sipun

¶29

Violation of any of the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

¶30

The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

¶31

( S.K. Sahoo)

¶32

Judge