Jagannatha Parida @ Jaganath & vs State Of Odisha
2023 Latest Caselaw 2916 Ori

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                 ABLAPL No.3105 of 2023

               Jagannatha Parida @ Jaganath & ....                     Petitioners
               Others
                                                           Mr. S.K. Dash, Advocate
                                           -versus-
               State of Odisha                        ....         Opposite Party
                                                        Mr. M.K. Mohanty, A.S.C.


                        CORAM:
                        JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
                                       ORDER

Order No. 06.04.2023

01. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the State.

2. By means of this application, the Petitioners seek grant of bail U/s.438 Cr.P.C. in apprehension of arrest for their alleged involvement in the offences U/s. 294/341/323/324/307/506/34, I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015).

3. The learned Addl. Standing Counsel pointed out that serious allegations are against the Petitioners. The materials alleged are attributable to the Petitioners and the offences are well made out against them.

4. Prima facie there are materials to implicate the Petitioners in the alleged offences. However, in view of the bar under Sections 18 and 18-A of the SC & ST (PA) Act, the present application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. The issue has been

// 2 //

examined by the Apex Court in the matter of Prithviraj Chauhan v. Union of India and Others, reported in (2020) 1 OLR SC 419. In paragraph-10 of the said judgment, it has been held that the provision of Section 438, Cr.P.C. shall not apply to the case involving offence under SC & ST (PA) Act, 1989. While saying so the Apex Court has further observed that, if the complaint does not make out a prima facie case or applicability of the provision of the Act, the bar created by Sections 18 & 18-A of the Act shall not apply.

5. Further, this Court in Pramod Kumar Ray and others v. State of Orissa, reported in (2017) 67 OCR 309, in the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court, reiterated the same principles. Hence, this present application is disposed of with the following observation.

(i) In the event the Petitioners surrender and move for bail before the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Paralakhemundi, Gajapati in G.R. Case No.27 of 2023 arising out of Gurandi P.S. Case No.23 of 2023 within three weeks from today, before the court in seisin over the matter the Petitioners shall serve copy of the bail application on the learned PP/Special PP as required by him for the purpose of notice to the victim or his/her counsel or dependent.

(ii) It is further directed that, on advance intimation, the Case Diary and other relevant materials be made available to the concerned court by the date of surrender.

6. The learned Court is further directed to consider the case of the Petitioners in accordance with law and shall dispose of the application on the very same day itself as far as possible, strictly on

// 3 //

its own merit. The Court is also not precluded from granting any interim protection to the Petitioners in appropriate circumstances but not in a routine manner.

7. It is made clear that the court concerned is to apply its wisdom in allowing / rejecting the prayer for bail keeping in view the weapon of offence used, gravity of offence and severity of punishment.

8. However, this order is subject to verification of the record of criminal antecedent of the Petitioners and the injuries if grievous. The ABLAPL is disposed of accordingly.

(Chittaranjan Dash) Judge

S.K. Parida