Orissa High Court
Bablu Mahananda vs State Of Odisha on 18 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No. 3181 of 2023
Bablu Mahananda .... Petitioner
Mr. Koustav Mohanty, proxy
counsel on behalf of Mr. S.
Mohapatra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opp. Party
Mr. T.K. Praharaj, Standing
Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 18.10.2023
Hybrid Mode
8. 1. The BLAPL has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
seeking release on bail, by the petitioner who is in jail
custody in connection with Bolangir Town P.S. Case No.28
of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 89 of 2023 pending
in the court of the learned SDJM, Balangir for the alleged
offences U/s.147/148/307/354/395/149 of IPC.
2. Learned proxy counsel for the petitioner submits
that he is not on the merits of the case, however, he
makes certain submissions. It is submitted that
Annexure-2, copy of the rejection order passed by the
learned court below dated 06.03.2023 prior to the
submissions of charge-sheet which has been submitted
on 17.05.2023.
3. By order dated 06.10.2023, learned counsel for the
petitioner was granted further opportunity directing the
matter to be listed today after it was adjourned earlier by
RJ
// 2 //
order dated 05.09.2023, 18.08.2023. On 11.08.2023, the
matter was adjourned as a new set of counsels were
engaged. Prior to that on 04.08.2023, the matter was
adjourned at the instances of the learned counsel for the
petitioner. On 20.04.2023, learned counsel for the State
was directed to obtain the case diary and up-to-date
instructions.
4. Learned proxy counsel seeks liberty to renew his
prayer for bail before the learned court in seisin of the
matter after withdrawing the present petition. Since
connected BLAPL No.2911 of 2023 arising out of the
same F.I.R. have been considered on merit pertaining to
four petitioners, it would not be appropriate to send the
matter for consideration by the learned court below after
this Court has considered the other petitions on merit
and has passed orders as far as prayer for bail is
concerned.
The prayer made by the learned proxy counsel is
therefore not acceded to and the petition is taken up on
merit. As far as merits of the case is concerned, stated by
the learned proxy counsel he has no submissions to
make.
5. Learned Standing Counsel refers to the past
allegations against the petitioner as far as criminal
activity is concerned. The total number of allegations are
21. The alleged activity against the petitioner started in
the year 2013 and in the following cases the petitioner
has been named as an accused as indicated herein:
(i) In G.R. Case No.449 of 2013, the petitioner was
convicted for the offence U/s.325 of IPC and
// 3 //
released on Section 4 of P.O. Act vide judgment
dated 01.08.2017 by the learned Assistant
Sessions Judge, Balangir.
(ii) In G.R. Case No.131 of 2014, the petitioner has
been acquitted vide order dated 13.08.2018 passed
by the learned Sessions Judge, Balangir.
(iii) In G.R. Case No.341 of 2016, the petitioner is on
bail vide Order dated 12.07.2016 by the 1st Addl.
Sessions Judge, Balangir.
(iv) In G.R. Case No.357 of 2016, the petitioner is on
bail vide order dated 12.07.2016 by the learned 1st
Addl. Sessions Judge, Balangir.
(v) In G.R. Case No.528 of 2016, the petitioner is on
bail vide order dated 29.06.2016 in BLAPL No.5103
of 2016 by this Court.
(vi) In G.R. Case No.56 of 2017, the petitioner is on
bail vide order dated 24.08.2018 in ABLAPL
No.1218 of 2017 by this Court.
(vii) In G.R. Case No.398 of 2017, the petitioner has
been acquitted vide Judgment and order dated
08.03.2023 passed by the learned JMFC-II,
Balangir.
(viii) In G.R. Case No.612 of 2017, the petitioner is
on bail vide order dated 28.08.2018 in ABLAPL
No.12879 of 2017 by this Court.
(ix) In G.R. Case No.615 of 2017, the petitioner is on
bail vide order dated 31.08.2017 in ABLAPL
No.13182 of 2017 by this Court.
(x) G.R. Case No.906 of 2017 is pending in the court
of SDJM, Balangir and the petitioner has been
// 4 //
noticed U/s.41(A) of Cr.P.C.
(xi) G.R. Case No.535 of 2022 is pending in the court
of SDJM, Balangir and the petitioner has been
noticed U/s.41(A) of Cr.P.C.
(xii) In G.R. Case No.1108 of 2022, the petitioner is
on bail vide order dated 16.08.2022 in ABLAPL
No.9799 of 2022 by this Court.
(xiii) G.R. Case No.89 of 2023 is pending in the court
of SDJM, Balangir and the petitioner is in jail
custody.
(xiv) In G.R. Case No.593 of 2018, the petitioner is
on bail vide order dated 02.12.2019 in BLAPL
No.5439 of 2018 passed by this Court.
(xv) In G.R. Case No.963 of 2018, the petitioner is on
bail vide order dated 02.12.2019 in BLAPL No.5418
of 2018 passed by this Court.
(xvi) In G.R. Case No.153 of 2018, the petitioner is
on bail vide order dated 05.05.2023 in BLAPL No.83
of 2018 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge,
Titilagarh.
(xvii) In G.R. Case No.8 of 2019, the petitioner is on
bail vide order dated 03.03.2020 in BLAPL No.6417
of 2019 passed by this Court.
(xviii) In G.R. Case No.12 of 2019, the petitioner is
on bail vide order dated 03.01.2020 in BLAPL
No.6002 of 2019 passed by this Court.
(xix) In G.R. Case No.580 of 2018, the petitioner is
on bail vide order dated 27.02.2020 in BLAPL
No.5609 of 2019 passed by this Court.
(xx) In G.R. Case No.202 of 2016, the petitioner is on
// 5 //
bail vide order dated 06.06.2016 in BLAPL No.216
of 2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge,
Balangir.
(xxi) In G.R. Case No.914(A) of 2018, the petitioner is
on bail vide order dated 16.12.2019 in BLAPL
No.5746 of 2019 passed by this Court.
6. This Court takes note of the fact that in the past on
so many occasions, this court has shown indulgence to
the petitioner when he has approached for bail and on
several occasions also, the learned court in seisin of the
matter have granted bail to the petitioner. On each
occasion, the petitioner has misutilised the liberty to the
extent that there has been repeated allegations against
pertaining to criminal activities, despite the conditions
imposed not to indulge in any kind of criminal activities.
For the last 10 years, the petitioner has been implicated
in as many as 21 cases convicted in one case, acquitted
in two cases and other cases are pending trial.
7. Learned Standing Counsel for the State referring to
the case diary, injuries sustained by the victim, the past
allegations of criminal activity of the petitioner opposes
the prayer for bail.
8. This Court has the occasion to go through the case
diary, injury report regarding the injured victim and
considering the fact that despite the indulgence shown by
this Court earlier granting bail and anticipatory bail to
the petitioner, he has again approached for bail after
misutilising the liberty granted earlier, prayer for grant of
bail to the petitioner is rejected at this stage.
// 6 //
The BLAPL is dismissed at this stage.
(M.S. Sahoo)
Judge
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: RADHARANI JENA
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: ohc
Date: 20-Oct-2023 14:07:53
