Disposed

Mahendra Bhabasagar v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC12 May 2025BLAPL/533/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 302 IPC in a Boudh murder case; petitioner in custody since December 2023 with 8 of 24 witnesses examined. Court granted bail without examining merits, citing prolonged detention and the right to speedy trial, imposing conditions including planting and maintaining 100 saplings for two years.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail in S.T. Case No.13 of 2024 with conditions including planting 100 saplings after monsoon 2025 and maintaining them for two years.

Mahendra Bhabasagar Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 533 of 2025

¶2

Mahendra Bhabasagar

¶3

..…... Petitioner Mr. Trilochan Nanda, Adv.

¶4

-Versus-

¶5

State of Odisha

¶6

………. Opposite Party

¶7

Ms. Gayatri Patra, ASC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

ORDER

12.05.2025

Order No. 01.

FIR No.	Dated	Police Station	Case No. and Courts’ Name	Sections
443	30.11.2023	Boudh	S.T. Case No.13 of 2024 pending in the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Boudh	Section 302 of IPC

¶14

This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶15

Signature Not Verified2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 14-May-2025 19:42:42

¶17

¶18

The Petitioner being in custody in Boudh P.S. Case No. 443 of 2023 corresponding to S.T. Case No.13 of 2024, pending in the court of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Boudh, registered for the alleged commission of offence under Section 302 of IPC has filed this petition for his release on bail.

¶19

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 13.11.2023 at about 8.00 A.M. the informant came to know that a dead body was lying in a wounded condition near Didingapadar village. Thereafter, the informant rushed to the spot and found that a male person aged about 40 to 50 years having cut injuries was lying dead. The informant suspected that the murder has been committed last night. Accordingly, he informed the police regarding the occurrence. Hence, this case.

¶20

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that out of 24 charge sheeted witnesses, 8 witnesses have already been examined. He further submits that the Petitioner has been implicated in this case based on the confessional statement of the co-accused persons. He further submits that the Petitioner is in custody since 06.12.2023. Hence, he submits that the Petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

¶21

Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that right to have speedy trial

¶22

Page 2 of 6

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 14-May-2025 19:42:42

¶25

¶26

is a fundamental right of a citizen. Hence, keeping a person in custody for such a long time without any trial is not justified and violative of his fundamental right. The importance of speedy trial has been emphasized in the case of Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. vs Home Secretary, State of Bihar , wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has iterated that:

¶27

"Speedy trial is, as held by us in our earlier judgment dated 26th February, 1979, an essential ingredient of 'reasonable, fair and just" procedure guaranteed by Article 21 and it is the constitutional obligation of the State to device such a procedure as would ensure speedy trial to the accused. The State cannot be permitted to deny the constitutional right of speedy trial to the accused on the ground that the State has no adequate financial resources to incur the necessary expenditure needed for improving the administrative and judicial apparatus with a view to ensuring speedy trial."

¶28

He further argues that the period of long incarceration suffered, which entitle the Petitioner for grant of bail. Right to Speedy trial is a fundamental right of an under trial prisoner and this observations have been resonated, time and again, in several judgments including that of Kadra Pahadiya & Ors. v. State of Bihar¹ wherein it has been held that the obligation of the State or the complainant, as the case may be, to proceed with the case with reasonable promptitude. Particularly, in a country like ours, where the large majority of the accused come

¶29

1 (1981) 3SCC 671 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 14-May-2025 19:42:42

¶30

Page 3 of 6

¶31

¶32

from poorer and weaker sections of the society and are not versed with laws and after face the dearth of competent legal advice. Of course, in a given case, if an accused demands speedy trial and yet he is not given one, may be a relevant factor in his favour. But an accused cannot be disentitled from complaining of infringement of his right to speedy trial on the ground that he did not ask for or insist upon a speedy trial.

¶33

The Supreme Court has also held in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi)² that incarceration has further deleterious effects where the accused belongs to the weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the event of an acquittal, the loss to the accused is irreparable), and ensure that trials - especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily.

¶34

Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner is alleged to be involved in the commission of a heinous offence of murder. Accordingly, he strongly opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

¶35

2 SLP (Crl.) No.915 of 2023 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 14-May-2025 19:42:42

¶36

Page 4 of 6

¶37

¶38

Without going into the merit of the case and based on the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of detention of the Petitioner in custody, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case with some stringent terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the learned court in seisin over the matter with further conditions that:-

¶39

i. the Petitioner shall appear before the trial court on each date of posting of the case;

¶40

ii. the Petitioner shall not indulge himself in any criminal offence while on bail; and

¶41

iii. the Petitioner shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

¶42

iv. The Petitioner, after the onset of monsoon (in between the months of July and August, 2025), shall plant 100 saplings of local varieties, such as mango, neem, tamarind, etc., around his village on government land, community land, or private land in the possession of the petitioner or his family members. In the event that suitable land is unavailable, the Revenue Authority shall assist in identifying land for the plantation.

¶43

Page 5 of 6

¶44

Signature Not Verified

¶45

Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 14-May-2025 19:42:42

¶46

¶47

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

¶48

The I.I.C. of the concerned police station, in coordination with the local Forest Officer, shall monitor whether the Petitioner has planted the saplings as required.

¶49

It is further directed that the Petitioner shall file an affidavit before the local police station, confirming that the saplings have been planted and that the petitioner will maintain those plants for a period of two years.

¶50