Surati Matri vs State Of Odisha
2021 Latest Caselaw 11304 Ori

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                     JCRLA No.72 of 2016



            Surati Matri                               ....             Appellant
                                                       Mr. S. Sourav, Advocate
                                          -versus-
            State of Odisha                            ....           Respondent
                                                               Mr. J. Katikia
                                             Additional Government Advocate

            CORAM:
            THE CHIEF JUSTICE
            JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY
                                        ORDER

Order No.                              03.11.2021
            I.A. No.56 of 2021

04. 1. This application has been filed by the Appellant seeking bail in the present appeal which is directed against the judgment and order dated 18th August, 2016 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Sundargarh in S.T. Case No.58/28 of 2015 convicting the present Appellant for life imprisonment (RI) along with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default to further RI for one year for the offence under Section 302 IPC.

2. It is stated that the Appellant has been in custody over six and half years now and there is no previous instance of any criminal case against him.

3. Although the case is projected by the prosecution as one in which PW 5 has been put forth as a witness to whom the Appellant is stated to have made an extra judicial confession, he turned

hostile during trial. In other words, while PW 5 is supposed to have told the police that the Appellant confessed to him about killing the deceased, in the trial he stated that the accused informed him the he had a scuffle the deceased and asked PW 5 to accompany him to the spot i.e. Gutitikira. PW 5 turned hostile on 9th November, 2015. Subsequently, the prosecution sought to examine the PW 14 on 4th August, 2016 to prove the theory of 'last seen'. Admittedly, PW 14 was examined for the first time in the Court.

4. There appears to be a discrepancy as to the number of injuries caused to the deceased. While the case of the prosecution is that there were four punctured wounds on the chest of the deceased, the evidence of PWs 2 and 5 shows that there was only one. Further, the weapon of the offence does not appear to have been produced in the trial Court for identification by the witnesses to the recovery.

5. For all of the aforesaid reasons, the Court is of the view that the Appellant has made out a prima facie case for the purposes of bail. While clarifying that none of the observations in this order will influence the final decision in the appeal, the Court directs that the Appellant be released on bail during pendency of the present appeal subject to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

6. The I.A. is disposed of.

I.A. No.57 of 2021

7. Recovery of the fine amount of Rs.10,000/- imposed by the trial Court shall remain stayed till disposal of the present appeal.

8. The I.A. is disposed of.

9. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.

(Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice

(B.P. Routray) Judge S.K. Jena/P.A.