Prasanta Marai vs State Of Odisha
2023 Latest Caselaw 2000 Ori

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                     BLAPL No. 1855 of 2023

                 Prasanta Marai                   ....                    Petitioner
                                                       Mr. D.K. Pani, Advocate
                                            -versus-

             State of Odisha                      ....                Opposite Party
                                                        Mr. P.K. Maharaj, ASC

                               CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

                                         ORDER

09.03.2023 Order No.

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

2. The Petitioner is an accused in G.R. Case No.4404 of 2022 pending on the file of learned J.M.F.C.-II(C.T), Sambalpur, arising out of Sason P.S. Case No.271 of 2022, for commission of offence under Sections 306/34 of IPC.

3. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sambalpur by order dated 08.02.2023 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been filed.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner is in custody since 03.11.2022 on the accusation of commission of offence under Section 306/34 of IPC.

5. It is the allegation against the present petitioner is that he along with other co-accused abused the victim for which she was forced to take the ultimate steps of ending her life.

6. It is submitted with vehemence that since charge sheet has been filed and prima facie even if the entire allegation qua the petitioner is taken at its face value, no case under Section 306 of IPC is made out, further continuance of the petitioner in custody is not warranted.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment of the Apex Court in the Case of M. Arjunan Vs. State Represented by its Inspector of Police reported in (2019) 3 SCC 315.

8. On a bare perusal of the judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is seen that the observations made by the Apex Court regarding ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 306 of IPC were after the judgment by the trial Court. Hence ex-facie the same has no relevance as the stage of consideration of bail application.

9. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail relying on the statement of the principal- Purna Ch. Seth.

10. On perusal of the statement of the principal- Purna Ch. Seth, it is seen that after the alleged occurrence the deceased was went home along with her relative. There is nothing on record to show that after the deceased left the college premises there is any overt act is attributed to the present petitioner.

11. Taking note of the same and age of the petitioner (22 years), this Court directs the petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin.

12. While releasing the petitioner on bail, learned Court below shall verify assertion regarding the criminal antecedent of the petitioner. If it comes to fore that the petitioner has criminal antecedent of any nature, this order shall stand recalled.

13. Additionally, it is directed that petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once every week on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin till conclusion of trial. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin.

14. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

15. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per the rules.

(V. NARASINGH) Judge Santoshi