Kalim Ansari vs State Of Odisha & Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 6304 Ori

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 6304 Ori
Judgement Date : 17 May, 2023

Orissa High Court

Kalim Ansari vs State Of Odisha & Another on 17 May, 2023

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                 CRLA No.51 of 2023



               Kalim Ansari                       ....            Appellant

                                             Mr.Asit Kumar Jena, Advocate

                                      -versus-
              State of Odisha & Another           ....      Respondents

Mr.G.D.Kar,Advocate, For the Bank

CORAM:

                      DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

      Order                              ORDER
      No.                               17.05.2023

              Dated    PoliceCase No.               Sections
F.I.R.
                       Station
                            and Courts'
 No.
                              Name
0036     24.06.2018 Raruan Special G.R. 363/376(2)(n) of the Indian
                           Case     No. Penal Code read with Section
                           40/5      of 3(2)(v) of SC & ST(P) Act.
                           2018/2019
                           pending in
                           the court of
                           Additional
                           Sessions
                           Judge-cum-
                           Special
                           Judge,
                           Karanjia

02. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

// 2 //

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned

counsel for the respondent.

3. This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section

14(A) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Act with

a prayer to release the appellant on bail in connection with

Raruan P.S. Case No.36 of 2018 corresponding to Special

G.R. Case No.40/5 of 2018/2019 pending in the court of

learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge,

Karanjia for commission of offence under Sections

363/376(2)(n) of IPC read with Section 3(2)(v) of SC & ST

Act.

4. The prosecution case in brief is that the younger sister of

the informant was found missing from 9 P.M. to 12 P.M. of

23.06.2018 the previous day of lodging of FIR. After

thoroughly search, the informant discovered his victim-

sister in village Haladia (Jharkhand) near a pond in an

unconscious condition having profused bleeding from her

private part. Thereafter, the victim was shifted to hospital

for treatment. After regaining sense she disclosed about

commission of rape on her by one Raju Patra of

Parataliabandh. Based on the statement of the victim, the

informant-brother lodged the FIR against the appellant.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

appellant is languishing in jail custody since 07.07.2019

which is near around five years. It is further submitted that

// 3 //

out of twenty four witnesses fourteen witnesses have

already been examined including the victim, medical

officers and other vital witnesses for which there is no

scope for tampering evidence and influencing prosecution

witnesses.

6. Learned counsel for the State though vehemently

opposes the bail of the appellant but concedes the long

detention of the petitioner in custody.

7. Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that right to have

speedy trial is a fundamental right of a citizen. Hence,

keeping a person in custody for such a long time without

any trial is not justified and violative of his fundamental

right. The importance of speedy trial has been emphasized in the case of Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. vs Home

Secretary, State of Bihar, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme

Court has iterated that:

"Speedy trial is, as held by us in our earlier judgment dated 26th February, 1979, an essential ingredient of 'reasonable, fair and just" procedure guaranteed by Article 21 and it is the constitutional obligation of the State to device such a procedure as would ensure speedy trial to the accused. The State cannot be permitted to deny the constitutional right of speedy trial to the accused on the ground that the State has no adequate financial resources to incur the necessary expenditure needed for improving the administrative and judicial apparatus with a view to ensuring speedy trial."

// 4 //

8. Without going into the merit of the case and considering

the submissions made coupled with the length of detention

of the appellant in custody this Court is inclined to release

the appellant on bail. Accordingly, it is directed that the

court in seisin over the matter shall release the appellant on

bail in the aforesaid case on stringent terms and conditions

with further conditions that:

i. the appellant shall appear before the I.O.

once in a fortnight between 10 A.M. to 12 P.M till conclusion of the trial; ii. the appellant shall appear before learned trial court on each date of posting of the case, iii. he shall not indulge in criminal offence while on bail and iv. he shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in any manner.