Dakoji Venkat Rao Vs State of Odisha

1. The petitioner is an accused in the F.I.R. in connection with Paralakhemundi P.S. Case No.341 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No.671 of 2024 registered on the allegation of the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 124(1)/ 109/ 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Paralakhemundi.

¶14

2. The learned Sessions Judge, Gajapati has rejected the bail application of the petitioner vide order dated 09.04.2025 in B.A. No.21 of 2025. The relevant portion of the order of the learned trial Court reads as

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

under:

¶17

“…… there is an agreement executed between the accused-petitioner with one Inja Venkat Raman, who is friend of the victim, regarding transaction of Rs.30,00,000/- and the background giving rise to this incident is that the first party (Inja Venkat Raman) did not return the amount to the accusedpetitioner and the investigation shows that the accused alleges that the reason of non-returning the amount is because of instigation of the victim. The learned prosecutor further submitted that in order to take revenge, this accused-petitioner purchased acid; instigated the other accused to throw it to the victim. He substantiated his such contention by inviting attention of the court to the statement of the co-accused recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The learned prosecutor further submitted that the analysis of the call detail reports of mobile phones also goes against the accusedpetitioner. The last point of submission is that investigation is going on and this is a peculiar, complicated and a very rate case and has very bad impact in the society, and hence, considering the involvement of the accused-petitioner, he should not be released on bail.”

¶18

3. Regard being had to the nature of the allegation against the petitioner and the period of custody since 06.05.2025, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his bail plea after the victim of the present case is examined by the prosecution in the trial Court.

¶19

4. It is expected that, the learned trial Court shall do well to see that the victim of the present case is examined preferentially over all other witnesses. The petitioner is also granted liberty to renew his bail plea after expiry of three months, if the victim could not be examined by that time.

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

5. With the aforementioned observation, the BLAPL is disposed of.

¶22

Subhasis

¶23

(S.S. Mishra) Judge

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 14-May-2025 17:45:41

¶26

Page 3 of 3

Dakoji Venkat Rao v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dakoji Venkat Rao 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

Susanta Routa @ Susanta Rout Vs State of Odisha

Sanjit Badi Vs State of Odisha

Gitanjali Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Sarat Padhan Vs State of Odisha

Manu Khan @ Sk. Rehman Vs State of Odisha

Lokanath Mallick Vs State of Odisha