Ranjan Behera @ Bapi Vs State of Odisha

Instant petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is filed for release of the petitioner on bail in connection with C.T. No.244 of 2024 pending in the file of learned J.M.F.C.(R), Balasore corresponding to Khantapada P.S. Case No.63 of 2024 (now pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Balasore in S.T. No.422 of 2024) on the grounds stated therein.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and other accused persons have assaulted the deceased thinking him to be a thief. It is further submitted that on account of the assault and injuries received, the deceased died. The submission is that the petitioner is equally situated like other accused persons and hence, extending parity, he should as well be enlarged on bail. It is submitted that the petitioner is alleged of having committed the overt act, like by lifting the deceased and throwing him to the ground and therefore, he has been singled out. Nevertheless, since

¶20

Page 1 of 4

¶21

other accused persons are allowed to go on bail, it is lastly submitted that the petitioner, who has been in judicial custody from 31^st March, 2024, should be extended the same relief.

¶22

On the contrary, Mr. Mohanty, learned ASC for the State strongly objects to the release of the petitioner on the ground that he has committed the excess and assaulted the deceased in a manner which has been disclosed by witnesses present near the place of occurrence and hence, rightly, therefore, the learned court below declined him to be released on bail and thus, the rejection order as at Annexure-5 is justified.

¶23

5. Perused the FIR as at Annexure-1.

¶24

The PM report is at Annexure-3, which reveals that the deceased received couple of injuries, such as, bruise and abrasion besides a swelling found on the right parietal region. In fact, from the FIR i.e. Annexure-1 and statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as at Annexure-1, it is made to understand that the petitioner and other accused persons committed the over acts and assaulted the deceased, who had entered inside the residential house of one Babu Patra, who is a co-accused, who according to learned counsel for the petitioner, is on bail at present. It is further made to reveal from Annexure-4 that the petitioner and others caught hold of the deceased, who was believed to be a thief for having trespassed into the alleged house and hence, was assaulted. On account of the assault and injuries received, so revealed from Annexure-3, the deceased died thereafter. The Court finds that in so far as the incident is concerned, it was not preplanned but the petitioner admittedly committed the excess along with the other accused persons. Of course, the petitioner is also

¶25

Page 2 of 4

¶26

alleged of having severely assaulted the deceased towards the end of the incident, the manner in which, it has been explained by the witnesses in their statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, the incident has taken place with the involvement of all the accused persons and as it has been earlier stated, was never planned. In course of hearing, it is informed to the Court with the chargesheet being filed, the case has been committed to the court of Sessions and charge is already framed in the meantime.

¶27

Considering the above facts and submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties and objection of Mr. Mohanty, learned ASC for the State and having regard to the circumstances under which the alleged occurrence took place, which has resulted in the unfortunate death of the deceased, who was wrongly identified and mistaken as a thief having entered inside the residential house of one of the co-accused persons and as others involved are claimed to be on bail, the Court is of the view that the petitioner, who has been in judicial custody for nearly nine months by now, should also be allowed to be enlarged subject to the following conditions.

¶28

Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶29

In the result, the petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. stands allowed. Consequently, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.T. No.224 of 2024 (S.T. No.422 of 2024) arising out of Khantapada P.S. Case No.63 of 2024 subject to him furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand) with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Balasore, who shall impose such other suitable conditions as deemed just and proper besides the following,

¶30

Page 3 of 4

¶31

such as, he shall not influence the material witnesses to the case, in any manner, whatsoever, while on bail.

¶32