Rosan Bibi And Another vs State Of Odisha
2023 Latest Caselaw 292 Ori

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                 ABLAPL No.67 of 2023

               Rosan Bibi and another               ....          Petitioners
                                            Mr. Amlan Shakti Paul, Advocate

                                           -versus-

               State of Odisha                        ....            Opp. Party
                                                             Mr. S. Patra, ASC

                        CORAM:
                        JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH


                                             ORDER

Order No. 09.01.2023

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

2. This is an application for bail U/s.438 Cr.P.C. filed by the Petitioners in anticipation of arrest for their alleged involvement in the offences U/s.498-A/294/323/506/34 of IPC read with Section 4 of the DP Act and Section-3(1)(r)/3(1)(s)/3(2)(va) of SC & ST (PA) Act.

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that Petitioner No.1 is the mother-in-law and Petitioner No.2 is the father-in-law of the victim. They are no way connected in the alleged crime. He further submits that the victim fled away without informing the present Petitioners and all of a sudden lodged an FIR.

4. 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

// 2 //

maintainable. The issue has been examined by the Apex Court in the matter of Prithvi Raj 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 before the learned ADJ-cum-1st Addl. District Judge, Khurda in Balugaon PS Case No.251 of 2022 corresponding to T.R. Case No.113 of 2022 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, the Case Diary and other relevant materials be made available to the concerned court as far as practicable by the date of surrender.

// 3 //

(iii) The learned Court is further directed to consider the case of the Petitioners in accordance with law strictly on its own merit applying its own wisdom and shall dispose of the application on the very same day if there be no other legal impediment. In the circumstance, the Court is not precluded from granting any interim protection in appropriate case, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, upon his satisfaction and not in routine manner. In no case, the court concerned shall be influenced by the observations of this court presuming the direction passed here in is directory, peremptory or in affirmative.

6. The ABLAPL is disposed of accordingly.

(Chittaranjan Dash) Judge

AKPradhan