Balaram Sahu @ Babu v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Jan 2025BLAPL/9496/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted under BLAPL; Orissa High Court, Cuttack; Justice Sashikanta Mishra; order dated 09.01.2025; Balaram Sahu@Babu v. State of Odisha; Rairakhol P.S. Case No. 121 of 2021; S.T. Case No. 53 of 2021; Sections 147/148/448/302/307/149 IPC (murder, attempt to murder, rioting/unlawful assembly, criminal trespass); axe blow to deceased's head per P.W.15 and P.W.18; hostile witnesses; parity with co-accused Anil Sahu bailed by Supreme Court; condition of personal appearance before trial court on each date without representation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail on such terms and conditions as the trial court in seisin may deem fit and proper to impose, including the condition of personal appearance before the trial court on each date of posting without representation. ¶¶22

Balaram Sahu @ Babu Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody in Rairakhol P.S. Case No. 121 of 2021 / S.T. Case No. 53 of 2021 for offences under Sections 147/148/448/302/307/149 IPC, should be released on bail.

¶¶22

Court's answer

Although the depositions of P.W.15 (informant, father of the deceased) and P.W.18 (brother of the deceased) attributed to the petitioner the specific overt act of dealing a blow with the blunt side of an axe on the head of the deceased, and almost all other witnesses turned hostile, the Court held that a lenient view could be taken because co-accused Anil Sahu, who had a larger role to play, had already been granted bail by the Supreme Court.

¶¶21

Ratio / Principle

Considering the facts and the period of detention, the prayer for bail was allowed; the petitioner is to be released on bail on such terms and conditions as the court in seisin over the matter may deem fit and proper to impose.

¶¶22

Key takeaways

A specific condition of bail is that the petitioner shall personally appear before the trial court on each date of posting of the case, without representation.ratio¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Orissa High Court (Sashikanta Mishra, J.), Order dated 09.01.2025 in BLAPL No. 9496 of 2024 — Balaram Sahu@Babu v. State of Odisha: Bail granted. Petitioner in custody in Rairakhol P.S. Case No. 121 of 2021 / S.T. Case No. 53 of 2021 (Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Raiarkhol) for offences under Sections 147/148/448/302/307/149 IPC. Though P.W.15 (informant, father of the deceased) and P.W.18 (brother of the deceased) deposed that the petitioner dealt a blow with the blunt side of an axe on the head of the deceased, and almost all other witnesses turned hostile, bail was allowed considering the period of detention and that co-accused Anil Sahu, who had a larger role to play, had been granted bail by the Supreme Court. Condition imposed: personal appearance by the petitioner before the trial court on each date of posting, without representation.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

BLAPL No. 9496 of 2024

¶3

Balaram Sahu@Babu …. Petitioner

¶4

Represented by Mr. A.K. Biswal, Advocate -Versus -

¶5

State of Odisha

¶6

…. Opp. Party

¶7

Represented by Addl. Standing Counsel

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

ORDER

09.01.2025

Order No.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶14

As per office note, the date of adjournment is mentioned as “09.01.2024” instead of “09.01.2025”. The same be corrected.

¶15

Office to make necessary correction.

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

¶17

The petitioner is in custody in connection with Rairakhol P.S. Case No. 121 of 2021 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 53 of 2021 pending in the court of learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Raiarkhol for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 147/148/448/302/307/149 of IPC.

¶18

The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that the petitioner along with two sons went to the house of the deceased and assaulted him and his father by means of axe and lathi. As a result, the deceased succumbed to his injuries and his father sustained multiple grievous injuries. It is submitted that several co-accused persons including

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

Anil Sahu, against whom direct allegations have been leveled, have been released on bail.

¶21

This Court has perused the depositions of the witnesses examined during trial. It is seen that the informant, who is the father of the deceased was examined as P.W.15. He clearly stated that the petitioner dealt a blow with the blunt side of the axe of the head of the deceased. Same is the version of P.W.18, the brother of the deceased. Almost all other witnesses have turned hostile. Considering the accusations against the petitioner and in particular the specific overt act attributed to him, this Court feels that a lenient view can be taken, particularly when one of the co-accused persons, namely, Anil Sahu, who had a larger role to play, has been granted bail by the Supreme Court.

¶22

Considering the above facts and the period of detention, I am inclined to allow the prayer for bail. Let the petitioner be released on bail on such terms and conditions as the court in seisin over the matter may deem fit and proper to impose including the condition that he shall personally appear before the trial court on each date of posting of the case without representation.

¶23