Orissa High Court
Sk. Rajit @ Ra vs State Of Odish on 5 February, 2025
Author: S.K. Panigrahi
Bench: S.K. Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH
IGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTAC
ACK
BLAPL No.828 of 2022
Sk. Rajit @ Ra
Raja .... Petitioner
Mr. Smruti Ra
Ranjan Rout,
Adv.
-versus-
State of Odish
isha .... Oppos
posite Party
Ms. J. Sahoo
hoo ASC
CORAM:
C
JU
JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
Order ORDER
No.5 05.02.2025
F.I. Dated Police Case No. Sectio
ctions
R. Statio and Courts'
No. n Name
555 20.10.2020
.2020 Sadar S.T. Case 302/449/120
120(B)/109
No.198 of /457/380/34
/34 of
2021 in I.P.C.
connection
with P.S.
Case No.555
of 2020
pending in
the court of
learned 1st
Additional
Sessions
Judge,
Cuttack
Signature Not Verified
1.
This matter
ter is taken up by hybrid mode.
Digitally Signed
Signed by: LITARAM MURMU
Designation: P.A. 2. Heard lear
learned counsel for the petitioner an
and learned
Reason: Authentication
Location: OHC
Date: 06-Feb-2025 19:13:22 counsel for the State.
// 2 //
3. The Petition
tioner is being in custody in connection
on w
with Sadar
P.S. Case No.
o.555 of 2020 corresponding to S.T.. Case
Ca No.198
of 2021, pen
pending before the court of the learned
le 1st
Additional Sessions
Ses Judge, Cuttack registered for
or the
t alleged
commission
n of offence under Sections
302/449/120(B)
0(B)/109/457/380/34 of the Indian Penal
nal Code has
filed this application
app under Section 439 of Cr.P.
r.P.C. for his
release on bail.
bail
4. The prosec
secution story, in brief, is that on 20.10.2020
20. at
about 12.022 P.M.,
P the informant received inform
rmation that
someone killed
illed her sister and health condition is serious
se and
when he hear
eard the same immediately went to the house of
the deceased
d and
a found the deceased Pravasini Pradhan
Pra died
on her bed. Then he suspected that her husban
band namely
Gopal Behera
era committed murder to her siste
ister. Hence,
reported thee m
matter for legal action.
5. Learned ccounsel for the petitioner submits
its that the
Petitioner has been in custody since 03.11.2020. Further,
Fu the
Petitioner submits
sub that seven witnesses have been
een examined
out of twenty
nty-four witnesses and the trial is nott li
likely to be
concluded in the near future. He further submit
mits that the
Petitioner was not the prime accused in this case
ase rather he
was only accompanied
acc with the person who
o h
had given
Digitally Signed
Signed by: LITARAM MURMU
Designation: P.A.
Reason: Authentication money to the
he supari killer. Since the Petitioner spent
sp such a
Location: OHC
Date: 06-Feb-2025 19:13:22
// 3 //
long time wh
which is more than three years in cu
custody, the
Petitioner dese
eserves to be released on bail.
6. Learned cou
counsel for the Petitioner submits thatt the
th Hon'ble
Supreme Cour
ourt has held that right to have speedy
edy trial is a
fundamental
al rright of a citizen. Hence, keeping
g a person in
custody forr such
su a long time without any trial iss not
no justified
and violative
ive of his fundamental right. The impo
mportance of
h been emphasized in the case of Hussainara
speedy triall has H
Khatoon & Ors.
Or vs Home Secretary, State of Biha
ihar, wherein
the Hon'blee Su
Supreme Court has iterated that:
"Spee
peedy trial is, as held by us in our ur earlier
judgm
dgment dated 26th February, 1979, an essential
es
ingred
gredient of 'reasonable, fair and just" pro
procedure
guara
aranteed by Article 21 and it is the constitu
titutional
obliga
ligation of the State to device such a proced
cedure as
would
uld ensure speedy trial to the accused. The State
canno
nnot be permitted to deny the constitutionaal right
of speedy
spe trial to the accused on the groundd that
th the
State
ate has no adequate financial resources to incur
thee ne
necessary expenditure needed for improvioving the
admin
ministrative and judicial apparatus with a vview to
ensur
suring speedy trial."
7. He further
her argues that the period of long incarceration
inc
suffered, whic
hich entitle the Petitioner for grant of bail.
b Right
to Speedy trial
tri is a fundamental right of an
n under
u trial
prisoner and
d this
t observations have been resonated
ted, time and
Digitally Signed
Signed by: LITARAM MURMU several judgments including thatt of Kadra
again, in se
Designation: P.A.
Reason: Authentication
Location: OHC
Date: 06-Feb-2025 19:13:22
// 4 //
Pahadiya & O
Ors. v. State of Bihar1 wherein it has been held
that the obliga
ligation of the State or the complainant,
nt, aas the case
may be, to proceed with the case with reasonable
r
promptitude.
e. Particularly, in a country like ours,
rs, where the
large majority
rity of the accused come from poorerr an
and weaker
sections of the society and are not versed with laws
aws and after
face the deart
earth of competent legal advice. Of course,
co in a
given case,, if aan accused demands speedy trial and yet he is
not given one,
ne, may be a relevant factor in his favo
avour. But an
accused cann
annot be disentitled from compla
plaining of
infringement
nt o
of his right to speedy trial on the gr
ground that
he did not ask for or insist upon a speedy trial.
8. The Suprem
reme Court has also held in Mohd. Muslim @
Hussain v.. S
State (NCT of Delhi)2 that incarcer
rceration has
further deleter
eterious effects where the accused belo
elongs to the
weakest econo
onomic strata: immediate loss of liveliho
lihood, and in
several cases,
es, scattering of families as well as loss of family
bonds and alie
alienation from society. The courts there
erefore, have
to be sensitive
itive to these aspects (because in thee event
ev of an
acquittal, the
he loss to the accused is irreparable),
), aand ensure
that trials - especially
e in cases, where speciall laws
la enact
stringent prov
visions, are taken up and concluded
d sp
speedily.
1981)3 SCC 671
Location: OHC SLP (Crl.) No. 915 of 2023
Date: 06-Feb-2025 19:13:22
// 5 //
9. Learned cou
counsel for the State vehemently oppose
osed the bail
prayer of the petitioner.
p
10. Withoutt go
going into the merits of the case and taking
t into
account thee period
pe of detention, this Court is off the
th opinion
that the Pet
etitioner deserves to be released
ed on bail.
Accordingly,, it is directed that the Petitioner bee released
re on
bail in the af
aforesaid case with some stringent
nt terms
t and
conditions as deemed
d just and proper by the learne
rned court in
seisin over the matter with further conditions that:--
i. the
he petitioner shall appear before the he llearned
triall co
court on each date of posting of the case;
cas
ii. he shall not indulge himself in any
y criminal
c
offenc
ence while on bail; and
iii he shall not tamper with the evidence
nce of the
prosec
secution witnesses in any manner.
iv. the Petitioner, shall plant 100 saplings
gs of local
varieti
rieties like mango, neem, tamarind etc.,
tc., around
his village
v on Government land/com ommunity
land/p
d/private land, if it is in the possession
sion of the
Petitio
titioner or his family members. In n case
c of
unava
availability of land, the Revenue Authority
Au
shall
ll aassist to indentify the land for plantation.
plan
Violation of any of the above conditions shall
sh entail
cancellation
n of the bail.
11. The I.I.C.
C. of
o the concerned Police Station, in coo
coordination
with the local
loca Forest Officer, shall monitor wh
whether the
Digitally Signed
Signed by: LITARAM MURMU
Designation: P.A. Petitioner has
as planted the saplings or not.
Reason: Authentication
Location: OHC
Date: 06-Feb-2025 19:13:22
// 6 //
12. It is furthe
rther made clear that the Petitioner shall
sh file an
affidavit after
fter the plantation of the saplings before
fore the local
Police Station,
ion, assuring that he shall maintain thos
hose saplings
for two years.
rs.
13. The Distric
strict Nursery/D.F.O. shall extend a helping
help hand
by supplying
ng tthe saplings to the Petitioner.
14. The BLAPL
APL is accordingly disposed of.
(Dr. S.K.Panig
nigrahi)
Judge
Sumitra
