Orissa High Court
Jaga@ Amiya Kumar Swain vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 14 November, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.7710 of 2024 & BLAPL No.7393 of 2024
Jaga@ Amiya Kumar Swain .... Petitioner
Mr. H.S. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. T.K. Acharya, learned
Additional Standing Counsel
BLAPL No.7393 of 2024
Kulu Bhuyan and others .... Petitioners
Mr. H.S. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. T.K. Acharya, learned
Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM:
HON'BLE JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
ORDER
Order No. Date of hearing : 12.11.2024 / date of judgment : 14.11.2024
06. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Since both bail applications have arisen out of G.R. Case
No.374 of 2024 in connection with Jagannath Prasad P.S. Case
No.242 of 2024 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C., Jagannath
Prasad in the district of Ganjam, then both the bail applications have
been taken up together analogously for their final disposal through
this common order.
3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the
petitioners and the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the
State.
4. The petitioners are in jail custody since June, 2024 having
been implicated under Sections 395/452/387 of the I.P.C., 1860 read
with Sections 25(1)(a)/27 of the Arms Act on the allegations alleged
against them(petitioners) by the informant that, she(informant) had
installed an unit named as "Shree Laxmi Cement Concrete Product"
in village Haripur under Gandadhar Grama Panchayat of Jagannath
Prasad Police Station in the district of Ganjam.
Five months prior to the lodging of the F.I.R., i.e., five months
prior to 16.06.2024, the petitioners were regularly demanding rupees
one crore as "DADABADI", from the informant, but, when
she(informant) did not fulfill the above illegal demand of the
petitioners, then they(petitioners) and their associates forcibly took
away her JCB, 3DX bearing Registration No.OD-32-2550, electric
poles amounting to cost of Rs.1,50,00.000/-(rupees one crore fifty
lakhs) in total and intimated the same to the informant over
telephone telling that, unless, she (informant) pays their demanded
"DADABATI", they(petitioners) shall not allow her unit to run and
also threatened her(informant) over phone to kill her along with her
family members, for which, she(informant) and her family members
concealed themselves in secret place for keeping her(informant) and
her family members out from the sight of the petitioners and their
associates.
Thereafter, on dated 16.06.2024, she (informant) lodged the
F.I.R. against the petitioners and their associates before the I.I.C.,
Jagannath Prasad Police Station alleging the aforesaid allegations
against them.
5. Basing upon such F.I.R., the I.I.C., Jagannath Prasad Police
Station registered a case vide Jagannath Prasad P.S. Case No.242
dated 16.06.2024 against the petitioners and started investigation.
6. During investigation, he (Investigating Officer) brought the
petitioners on remand to this case from Jagannath Prasad P.S. Case
No.241 of 2024 and Bhanganagar P.S. Case No.459 of 2024 in the
month of June, 2024 and since then they(petitioners) are in custody.
7. During the course of hearing of the bail applications of the
petitioners, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted for
liberal consideration of their bail contending that, investigation of the
case has already been completed since 06.10.2024, the petitioners are
in custody for about more than five months and the F.I.R. has been
lodged five months after the alleged incident, to which, learned
Additional Standing Counsel for the State vehemently opposed
contending that, they(petitioners) are habitual offenders, as they are
involved in several cases, for which, the life of the informant and her
family members shall remain in danger, in case of release of the
petitioners on bail and there is every possibility of involvement of
the petitioners in the similar nature of crime again, for which, they
(petitioners) should not be allowed to go on bail.
8. When, it is forthcoming from the available police papers that,
the petitioners are in jail custody for about more than five months
and when during the staying of the petitioners inside the jail, the
investigation of the case has already been completed, for which, the
presence of the petitioners before the Investigating Officer for the
purpose of any further investigation of the case may not be required
and when, it is not the case of the prosecution that, the petitioners
have not cooperated the investigation and when the F.I.R. has been
lodged by the informant, five months after the alleged threats on her,
as it has been alleged in the F.I.R. that, there was continuous threat
and demand by the petitioners since last five months and when, it is
forthcoming from the charge-sheet submitted by the Investigating
Officer that, all the alleged stolen properties have already been
recovered and seized and when the main purpose/object of bail is to
secure the attendance of the accused persons during trial and when
there is no certainty that, when the trial of the case against the
petitioners shall be completed and when, the presence of the
petitioners during trial of the case is not unsecured as,
they(petitioners) are local men under the jurisdiction of Jagannath
Prasad Police Station, then at this juncture, by taking the above
factors into account, it is felt proper to allow them (petitioners) to go
on bail with stringent conditions looking to the future safety and
security of the informant, her family members, witnesses as well as
the interest of the prosecution imposing conditions not to allow the
petitioners to be involved with similar nature of crime in future.
9. Therefore, both the bail applications filed by the petitioners
are allowed.
10. They(petitioners) are allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs.1,00,000/-(rupees one lakh) with two solvent sureties
each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in
seisin over the matter on the following conditions, i.e.,:-
(i) They(petitioners) shall not involve with similar
nature of crime in future.
(ii) They shall remain present personally in the court
in each date of the case till the conclusion of its
trial.
(iv) They shall not terrorize, coerce, influence or
threat any witnesses to the prosecution, informant
and her family members either directly or
indirectly in any manner whatsoever at any stage
of the proceeding of the case till the conclusion of
its trial.
(v) They(petitioners) shall appear before the I.I.C.,
Jagannath Prasad P.S. on the 2nd and last „Sunday‟
of each month hence within 10.00 A.M. to 4.00
P.M. till the conclusion of the trial of the case
reporting about their non-involvement with any
crime after their release on bail,
but, in case of their failure to comply any one of
the aforesaid conditions, the leaned court in seisin
over the matter is authorized cancel their
respective bail orders outrightly without seeking
any permission for the same from this Court.
14. Accordingly, both the bail applications filed by the petitioners
are disposed of finally with a copy to the I.I.C., Jagannath Prasad
Police Station for his information and to report before the court in
seisin over the matter, in case of violation of any of the conditions by
any of the petitioners for necessary orders.
15. Issue certified copy of this order to the petitioners on their
proper application.
( A.C. Behera )
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
The 14th of November, 2024/ Jagabandhu, P.A.
Designation: Personal Assistant
