Disposed¶7

Pradip@Pradeep Das v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC8 Apr 2025CRLMC/1058/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

interim bail extension on medical grounds; NBW set aside; heart stroke and dialysis; kidney donor unproven; surrender deadline 30.04.2025; T.R. Case No.32 of 2020 Umerkote; BLAPL No.10879 of 2023; BLAPL No.11625 of 2023; CRLMC No.1058 of 2025; High Court of Orissa; Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra; order dated 08.04.2025.

What did the court decide?

Further three months' interim bail granted to petitioner No.1 with execution of NBW against him set aside; petitioner No.2 denied interim bail at this stage but NBW execution against him stayed till 30.04.2025 with liberty to surrender on or before that date and no extension of time permitted; CRLMC disposed of. ¶7

Pradip@Pradeep Das Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶7

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner No.1, Pradip @ Pradeep Das, who is gravely ill, is entitled to extension of interim bail for a further period of three months despite having failed to surrender on expiry of the earlier interim bail. +1 more

¶21

Court's answer

Petitioner No.1 (Pradip @ Pradeep Das) is entitled to interim bail for another period of three months; the medical documents show he is terribly ill, and sending him to custody would mar his ongoing treatment.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

If petitioner No.2 is accepted as a valid kidney donor to his father as per medical protocol, he may apply for interim bail.

¶22

Key takeaways

Execution of the NBW issued by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Umerkote in T.R. Case No.32 of 2020 against petitioner No.1 is set aside; the trial Court is directed to release petitioner No.1 on interim bail for three months on such conditions as deemed fit and proper.ratio¶24
Interim bail is refused to petitioner No.2 at this stage, no document having been placed on record showing he is the kidney donor.ratio¶24
Liberty is granted to petitioner No.2 to appear/surrender before the Court below on or before 30.04.2025 and resort to remedies available under law; execution of the NBW against him is stayed till 30.04.2025; no extension of time for surrendering shall be allowed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Orissa High Court (S.S. Mishra, J.), CRLMC No.1058 of 2025, decided 08.04.2025: Petitioners faced NBW issued by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Umerkote in T.R. Case No.32 of 2020 after failing to surrender on expiry of three months' interim bail earlier granted in BLAPL Nos.10879 & 11625 of 2023. On medical documents showing petitioner No.1 had suffered two heart strokes and undergoes regular dialysis, the Court held he was entitled to a further three months' interim bail and set aside execution of the NBW against him, directing the trial Court to release him on interim bail on suitable conditions. Petitioner No.2, the son claiming to be a kidney donor for his father but without any supporting document, was refused interim bail at this stage; execution of the NBW against him was stayed till 30.04.2025 with liberty to appear/surrender on or before that date, and it was made clear that no extension of time for surrendering would be allowed. If accepted as a valid kidney donor per medical protocol, petitioner No.2 may apply for interim bail.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLMC No.1058 of 2025

¶3

Pradip @ Pradeep Das and …. Petitioner(s) another

¶4

Mr. S. K. Dash, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha

¶7

Ms. S. Moharana, ASC

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

ORDER

Order No.

03.

1. Heard.

08.04.2025

2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 04.10.2024 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Umerkote in T.R. Case No.32 of 2020, whereby the learned Court below has issued NBW against them.

¶15

3. Earlier on 22.03.2024, this Court while allowing the BLAPL No.10879 of 2023 & BLAPL No.11625 of 2023 granted three months interim bail to the petitioners on the ground that the petitioner No.1 is terribly ill and there is no one in the family to look after the petitioner No.1. Hence, the petitioner No.2 is also extended three months interim bail to take care of his father i.e.

¶16

petitioner No.1. However, they did not surrender after completion

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

of the interim bail period, which expired on 01.07.2024. Hence, the

¶19

learned trial Court has passed the impugned order.

¶20

4. Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on

¶21

record various medical documents and submits that as per the documents, the petitioner No.1 has suffered two heart stroke apart from that he is undergoing regular dialysis. He further submits that the petitioner No.2, who is the son of the petitioner No.1 is going to donate the kidney to his father. Therefore, he is pressing for extension of interim bail for a further period of three months. However, Mr. Dash, learned counsel fails to place on record any document suggesting that the petitioner No.2 is the donor of the kidney.

¶22

5. Perusal of the medical documents placed on record reveals that the petitioner No.1 is terribly ill. No fruitful purpose would be served to send the petitioner No.1 in custody which would definitely marred the ongoing treatment. Therefore, I am of the considered view that the petitioner No.1 namely Pradip @ Pradeep Das is entitled to interim bail for another period of three months. In the meantime, if the petitioner No.2 is accepted as the valid kidney donor to his father as per medical protocol, he may also apply for interim bail.

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

6. Accordingly, the execution of NBW issued by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Umerkote in T.R. Case No.32 of 2020 against the petitioner No.1 is set aside. The learned trial Court is directed to release the petitioner No.1to interim bail for a period of three months on such conditions as deem, fit and proper. In so far as the petitioner No.2 is concerned, I am not inclined to grant him on interim bail at this stage. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner No.2 to appear/surrender before the Court below on or before 30.04.2025 and resort to the remedy available to him under law. Till then, the execution of NBW issued by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Umerkote in T.R. Case No.32 of 2020 against him is stayed till 30.04.2025.Its made clear that no extension of time for surrendering shall be allowed to the petitioner No 2.

¶25

7. With this observation, the CRLMC is disposed of.

¶26

(S.S. Mishra) Judge

¶27

Swarna

¶28

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: SWARNAPRAVA DASH Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 09-Apr-2025 11:10:27

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Pradip@Pradeep Das v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradip@Pradeep Das 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Duryadhan Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Gurdeep Singh Vs State of Odisha

Sarat Rout Vs State of Odisha

Padmanava Mohapatra Vs State of Odisha

Pitabasa Sahu@Tulu Vs State of Odisha

Nrusingha Charan Swain Vs State of Odisha(Vig.)