Manas Ranjan Pati Vs State of Odisha

Instant petition under Section 483 BNSS is filed for release of the petitioner on bail in connection with Nischintakoili P.S. Case No.35 of 2024 corresponding to Special G.R. Case No.34 of 2024 pending in the file of learned ADJ-cum-Special Court under POCSO Act, Cuttack on the grounds stated therein.

¶18

Gone through the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., wherein, she has alleged kidnapping. Mr. Satapathy, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, denies with the claim that the petitioner and the victim had arranged marriage and in support of such claim and the marriage having taken place, he refers to additional documents at Flag-‘A’ filed along with a memo. Considering the same and the custody of the petitioner ever since arrested, with the submission that the victim was not satisfied

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

with such marriage due to age gap between her and the petitioner, it is claimed that she developed a story during investigation. The further submission is that the parents of both the sides have been held responsible for child marriage since the victim is a minor and with such submission the release of the petitioner is pleaded.

¶21

Mr. Rout, learned counsel and his associates appears for the informant and files Vakalatnama in Court today, which is accepted and taken on record with a request for an adjournment as he is to receive instructions.

¶22

Mr. Satapathy, learned ASC for the State, on the other hand, seriously objects to the release of the petitioner on the ground that there is kidnapping and other overt acts committed by him involving a minor. The case diary with relevant documents are produced by learned ASC for the State at the time of hearing. Upon perusal of the same, this Court finds that investigation was concluded with the filing of chargesheet in the month of January, 2025. The details of the circumstances leading to lodging of the FIR are narrated in the chargesheet. The Court further finds from the chargesheet that the parents as well as the mediator and priests are held liable under Section 10 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 for having abated the marriage between the minor and the petitioner. The Court further finds that there has been disturbance in the lives of the parties after such marriage. Even though initially mischief is alleged towards kidnapping of the minor in the hands of the petitioner’s family but at the end, there has been a marriage solemnized between the two. As earlier stated, child marriage is alleged by the local police making the parents of both the sides to be responsible for the same.

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

Having regard to the above facts and submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and also learned ASC for the State and learned counsel for the informant, who entered appearance today but in view of the fact that there is closure of investigation with the filing of chargesheet with all such material evidence to have been collected in respect of the alleged mischief and marriage claimed to be in violation of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, this Court is of the view that the petitioner, having remained in custody from 26^th November, 2024, should be allowed to go on bail subject to following conditions.

¶25

Hence, it is ordered.

¶26

In the result, petition under Section 483 BNSS stands allowed. Consequently, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Nischintakoili P.S. Case No.35 of 2024 corresponding to Special G.R. Case No.34 of 2024 subject to him furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/-(Rupees forty thousand) with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of learned ADJ-cum-Special Court under POCSO Act, Cuttack, who shall impose such other suitable conditions as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶27

9. The BLAPL is disposed of.

¶28

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

¶29

Alok (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: ALOK RANJAN SETHY Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 13-Mar-2025 18:03:43

¶32

Page 3 of 3

Manas Ranjan Pati v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manas Ranjan Pati 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

Sunil Naik Vs State of Odisha

Sibananda Behera @ Sibu Vs State of Odisha

Nilambar Padhan @ Chhota @ Narendra Padhan Vs State of Odisha

Jagabandhu Mallik Vs State of Odisha

Raju @ Rajendra Panda Vs State of Odisha

Rajib Kumbhar @ Gandhi Vs State of Odisha