Sukanta Routray @ Sukanta vs State Of Odisha
2021 Latest Caselaw 6327 Ori

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                 BLAPL No. 1528 of 2021


             Sukanta Routray @ Sukanta       ....              Petitioner
            Chandra Rout.
                                                  Mr.D.Das, Advocate

                                 -versus-
             State of Odisha                 ....          Opposite Party
                                                             Sk.Zaffrulla
                                             Additional Standing Counsel

             CORAM:
             JUSTICE S. K. PANIGRAHI

                                 ORDER

Order No. 11.06.2021

03 1. This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

3. The petitioner is an accused in G.R. Case No.587(A) of 2015 arising out of Choudwar P.S. Case No.104 of 2015 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C.(R) at Cuttack for commission of offences under Sections 498-A/304-B/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act.

4. The prosecution allegation in brief is that, the sister of the informant had married to the present petitioner as per Vedic rites on 12.07.2021. At the time of marriage, as per the demand of the groom side, all the household articles including cash of Rs.23,000/- had been given as dowry. But subsequently, the in-laws member demanded more dowry of Rs.1 lakh to which she could not comply. Thereafter, they killed her and hanged her to give colour of suicide.

// 2 //

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is no way connected in this case. The informant has falsely foisted this case against the petitioner with an ulterior motive to put him behind the bar. It is further submitted that the FIR lodged by the informant is completely silent about the role of the present petitioner for commission of the death of his wife. The principal accused, who had active role in commission of the alleged offence, has already been acquitted by the judgment passed by the learned court below in S.T. Case No.269 of 2016. Since the petitioner did not appear during course of trial he was shown as absconder and on the strength of N.B.W. he was arrested and has been languishing in custody since 01.02.2021.

6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail application.

7. Learned counsel for the State though opposed the bail application but conceded the factum of acquittal of the principal accused who was involved in the commission of the alleged crime.

8. Considering the submissions made and the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of detention in custody, it is directed that the petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the learned court in seisin over the matter with further conditions that:-

i)the petitioner shall appear before the trial court on each date of hearing of the case;

ii)he shall not involve himself in any criminal activities while on bail; and

9. The BLAPL is, accordingly, disposed of.

// 3 //

10. As the restrictions due to the COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the petitioner may utilize a soft copy of this order available in the High Court's website or print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed, vide Court's Notice No.4587, dated 25th March 2020.

(S. K. Panigrahi) Judge LNB