Ch Vicky Patra Vs State of Odisha

Instant petition under Section 483 BNSS is filed for release of the petitioner on bail in connection with G.R. Case No.1642 of 2023 pending in the file of learned SDJM, Chatrapur arising out of Chamakhandi P.S. Case No.441 dated 15^th December, 2023 on the grounds stated therein.

¶15

Perused the FIR as at Annexure-1 and the rejection order i.e. Annexure-2.

¶16

Mr. Chand, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not present at the spot when the alleged

¶17

Page 1 of 4

¶18

occurrence took place and as such, his name is not mentioned in the FIR i.e. Annexure-1. It is further submitted that the witness, who was at the spot and saw the assault taking place, was examined on 5^th December, 2023 but he did not reveal anything with regard to the presence of the petitioner, who was contacted thereafter by other accused persons, however, a changed version was received, while recording his statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. almost three months after, wherein, he included the name of the petitioner. It is submitted that the alleged occurrence took place after a cricket match was held, when the deceased had been to there to watch the same. It is submitted that the deceased was assaulted by fist blows and kicks by the accused persons and that too, at that time, the petitioner was not present, though his involvement is alleged by the said witness, namely, E. Daneya before the Court under Section 164 Cr.P.C. While claiming so, Mr. Chand, learned counsel produced the statements of the above witness recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. in Court and the same are perused. It is finally submitted that the chargesheet has been filed with the closure of investigation and in so far as the petitioner is concerned, he is in judicial custody for more than one year, hence, therefore, he should be allowed to go on bail subject to any conditions.

¶19

Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel appearing for the informant objected the release of the petitioner on bail, as there is evidence to connect him to the alleged occurrence.

¶20

Mr. Ray, learned AGA for the State equally opposed such release of the petitioner on bail, since the assault meted out to the deceased was on account of a pre-plan allegedly after the cricket match was concluded. It is submitted that the deceased was invited

¶21

Page 2 of 4

¶22

as a guest for the match, but was assaulted under the circumstances narrated by the witnesses including the witness, namely, E. Daneya, hence, therefore, a prima face case is made out against him.

¶23

Gone through the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the witness, namely, E. Daneya, post-mortem report of the deceased and other relevant documents produced in Court by Mr. Chand, learned counsel for the petitioner. It is made to understand from the materials on record that during and in course of the events, the alleged assault has taken place. Of course, the witness, namely, E. Daneya did not disclose the name of the present accused while being examined by the police, but stated otherwise before the Court below in his statement recorded under Section 164, Cr.P.C. It is made to understand that the assault to the deceased was by means of an iron punja, as revealed from the FIR, but then, the name of the petitioner is not revealed in the FIR nor initially by the witness, namely, E. Daneya, who was examined barely two days after the alleged occurrence.

¶24

Considering the above facts and the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties, since it is made to suggest that the petitioner was not present at the spot and further considering the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the material witness, namely, E. Daneya, as he appears to be on a separate footing than other co-accused persons and the fact that on closure of the investigation charge-sheet was filed in the month of April, 2024, this Court is inclined to direct release of the accused subject to the following conditions.

¶25

Hence, it is ordered.

¶26

Page 3 of 4

¶27

In the result, the petition under Section 483 BNSS stands allowed. Consequently, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with G.R. Case No.1642 of 2023 arising out of Chamakhandi P.S. Case No.441 of 2023 subject to his furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/-(rupees forty thousand) with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM, Chatrapur, who shall be at liberty to impose such other suitable conditions besides the following, such as, he shall not influence any of the material witnesses to the occurrence and shall appear before the court in seisin over the matter on each dates of posting without fail.

¶28

11. The BLAPL is disposed of.

¶29

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.

¶30

(R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

¶31

GDS

¶32

Signature Not Verified

¶33

Digitally Signed Signed by: GAYADHAR SAMAL Designation: JOINT REGISTRAR-CUM-PRINCIPAL SECRETARY Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CUTTACK Date: 15-Jan-2025 12:16:28

¶34

Page 4 of 4

Ch Vicky Patra v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ch Vicky Patra 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

Sarita Yadav Vs State of Odisha

Bhimasen Digal Vs State of Odisha

Rajendra Mallick Vs State of Odisha

Chenta @ Balaram Behera Vs State of Odisha

Sasmita Behera Vs State of Odisha

Bhagirathi Meher Vs State of Odisha