Orissa High Court
Bipin Bihari Das vs State Of Odisha on 9 April, 2025
Bench: S.K. Sahoo, Chittaranjan Dash
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No. 414 of 2024
Bipin Bihari Das .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr. S.K. Bhanjadeo, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mr. Aurobinda Mohanty,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
ORDER
Order No. 09.04.2025
10. I.A. No.897 of 2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the Appellant-Petitioner and
learned counsel for the State.
2. The Appellant-Petitioner has been convicted under
section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to
undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand), in default of payment of the fine
amount, to undergo R.I. for further period of six months, by
the learned Sessions Judge, Nayagarh, vide judgment and
order dated 22.10.2022 passed in S.T. Case No.103 of 2020.
3. Mr. Bhanjadeo, learned counsel for the Appellant-
Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is in judicial custody
since 01.06.2020 and though P.W.11 Banshidhar Das posed
himself as an eye-witness to the occurrence and stated to have
seen the Appellant beating the deceased by means of a rolling
wooden stick, but it appears that he disclosed about the same
before others including the informant and went to Dasapalla
P.S. along with the informant on the next date of the
occurrence and F.I.R. was lodged at about 9 O'clock on
31.05.2020 against unknown persons. Mr. Bhanjadeo, further
submits that if P.W.11 was an eye-witness to the occurrence
and disclosed the said aspect before the informant and also
accompanied the informant to the Police Station to lodge
F.I.R., in that event the name of the Appellant would have
been there in the F.I.R. But, lodging of the F.I.R. against
unknown persons shows that by the time of lodging of the
F.I.R. nobody was aware about the name of the culprit and the
Petitioner has been subsequently entangled in the case. It is
further argued that, the rolling wooden stick, which was the
weapon of offence according to P.W.11, was seized by the
I.O. and sent for chemical examination and no blood stain was
found on it, and even the M.O. was not shown to the eye-
witness (P.W.11) to get it identified. He further submits that
the Appellant-Petitioner has good chance of success in the
Appeal and the balance of convenience also lies in his favour
and, therefore, the bail application may be favourably
considered.
4. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, relying
on the evidence of the eye-witness as well as the evidence of
the Doctor (P.W.14), vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsels for the respective parties, nature of the evidence
adduced during trial, absence of the name of the Appellant-
Petitioner in the F.I.R., period of detention of the Petitioner in
judicial custody, and absence of any chance of early hearing
of the Appeal in near future, we are inclined to release the
Petitioner on bail.
6. Let the Appellant-Petitioner namely Bipin Bihari Das be
released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond
of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand) with one local
solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the
learned trial Court subject to the condition that he shall not
indulge in any criminal activities in any manner whatsoever.
7. Violation of any of the conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail.
8. The I.A. is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
(S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
Designation: ADR-cum-ADDL. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY Judge
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 10-Apr-2025 13:27:08
S.K. Parida
