Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 16317 Ori
Judgement Date : 6 November, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ABLAPL No.12137 of 2024
1) Sunil Kumar Behera @ ..... Petitioners
Minja
2) Subhadra Behera Represented By Adv. -
3) Swarnalata Behera@ Swarnamayee Arun Kumar Behera
4) Arun Behera@ Puchu
-versus-
State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Samaresh Jena, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
06.11.2024 Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the Opposite Party-State.
3. The present application has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 by the Petitioners seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Talasari Marine P.S. Case No.98 of 2024, corresponding to C.T. Case No.713 of 2024, pending in the court of learned Gramya Nyayalaya-cum-J.M.F.C., Bhograi, Balasore, for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 85, 115(2), 296, 3(5), 351(2) of BNS read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act.
4. It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioners that the Petitioners are in-law's family members of the Informant. He further contended that the Informant is the wife of one Anil Kumar Bera,
who happens to be the son of Petitioner No.2. So far the present Petitioners are concerned, they are the in-law's family members of the Informant. Leaned counsel for the Petitioners further referring to the allegation made in the FIR, submitted that major allegation made against the husband of the Informant, namely one Anil Kumar Bera. However, the present Petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioners referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and another reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, contended that the in-law's family of the Informant have been falsely implicated in the present case.
5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand objected to the release of the Petitioner on pre-arrest bail on the ground that the allegations are grave and serious in nature. Accordingly, the pre- arrest bail should be rejected at this juncture.
6. Considering the nature of allegation, gravity of offence and the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners. However, it is directed that in the event the Petitioners surrender before the Court in seisin over the matter within a period of four weeks from today and move an application for bail, the Court in seisin over the matter shall release them on bail in connection with the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
7. The release of the Petitioners shall also be subject to following conditions:-
i) shall cooperate with the investigation and appear before
the I.O. as and when his presence is required and shall cooperate with the early conclusion of the investigation;
ii) shall not harass, threaten or terrorize the Informant and her family members in any manner whatsoever;
Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.
8. Accordingly, the ABLAPL is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
S.K. Rout
Digitally Signed Page 3 of 3.
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 07-Nov-2024 17:20:42
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!