Orissa High Court
Deepak Jena @ Pradhan vs State Of Odisha .... Opp. Party(S) on 16 January, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.881 of 2023
Deepak Jena @ Pradhan .... Petitioner(s)
Mr. Lalitendu Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opp. Party(s)
Mr. U. R. Jena, AGA
CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 16.01.2025
03. 1. Heard.
2. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Balipatana
P.S. Case No.10 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. Case No.43 of 2013
for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under
Sections 147/148/ 341/294/307/302/427/149 of the IPC, pending in
the Court of learned J.M.F.C.(O), Bhubaneswar.
3. The prosecution case is that on 20.01.2013, the
complainant reported at Balipatna P.S. alleging that there was long
standing dispute between two villagers Madhupur and Mangalpur
regarding the sand sairat and illegal construction of house on the
river embankment on the Govt. land. The villagers of Madhupur
were planning to put in trouble to the villagers of Mangalpur and to
kill some of them. On 20.01.2013, when the informant along with
Jituna Mallick and Kartik Pradhan (deceased) had been to
Jagannathpur Bazar, on their way near Phulpal Patna, the accused
persons being armed with deadly weapons like sword, bhujali and
iron rod, came and attacked them. To save their life, Jituna Mallick
and Bulu Pradhan ran away towards the paddy field and Kartika ran
away towards Sakhigopal canal, where the accused persons
assaulted him brutally and killed him and fled away from the spot.
Basing upon this fact, the F.I.R. was registered.
4. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed on
20.01.2013 showing the petitioner is an absconder. Three accused
persons, namely, Soumendra Ranjan Jena, Babula @ Biswa Ranjan
Jena and Benudhar Jena have faced the trial and insofar as the
present accused and other absconding accused persons are
concerned, the trail was splited. Benudhar Jena while facing the
trial, died on 7.1.2015 and the trial qua him has been abated. Insofar
as the other two co-accused persons are concerned, they have been
acquitted by the learned trial Court vide judgment dated 13.07.2016
in S.T. Case No.109 of 2014. By relying upon the said judgment,
the petitioner is seeking quashing of the F.I.R. qua him.
5. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon
the order dated 19.09.2024 passed by this Court in CRLMC
No.3307 of 2024. One of the co-accused, namely, Pradeep Jena,
who is similarly situated, had approached this Court by filing the
afore-referred petition. This Court vide its order dated 19.09.2024
has passed the following order:
<6. Considering the submissions made by the counsels
appearing for the respective parties and, on a careful
examination of the materials on record, further keeping
in view the judgment dated 13.07.2016, this Court is of
the view that it is open to the Petitioner to participate in
the trial and take advantage of the judgment of
acquittal in the split up trial as is permissible in law.
However, considering the facts of the case, this Court is
not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner.
However, on the submission of the leaned senior
counsel, the Petitioner is given liberty to surrender
before the learned J.M.F.C.(O), Bhubaneswar, in the
aforesaid case in the first hour within 21 working days
hence and move for bail. On such event, the learned
Magistrate shall consider his application for bail in the
first hour strictly on the basis of the materials on
record. In case of rejection of the bail application, the
Petitioner may move for bail before the higher forum in
the second hour. On such event, the higher forum shall
consider and dispose of the bail application of the
Petitioner on the same day strictly on the basis of the
materials on record by maintaining the principles of
parity, if applicable. Case Diary be made available to
the concerned courts. Records be transmitted to the
higher forum at the cost of the Petitioner, if applied for.
7. Further, it is directed that the learned Court in seisin
over the matter shall consider the bail application of
the Petitioner by keeping in view the aforesaid
observation. Further, it is directed that in the event the
Petitioner is released on bail, learned Court below
shall impose certain conditions whereby the Petitioner
shall cooperate with the investigation for early
conclusion of the trial by appearing before the trial
Court on each and every date fixed without fail, if not
prevented by any sufficient cause.=
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner, who is similarly situated like the co-accused Pradeep
Jena, is entitled to the same relief.
7. Taking into consideration the facts of this case and relied
upon the order of this Court, I am inclined to allow this petition by
giving liberty to the petitioner to appear/surrender before the
learned Courts below on or before 31.01.2025 and resort to the
remedy available to him under law. Till then, the execution of the
N.B.W. dated 18.05.2013 passed by the learned J.M.F.C.(O),
Bhubaneswar in G.R. Case No.43 of 2013 shall be kept in
abeyance.
8. It is also made clear that in the event the learned trial
Court enlarge the petitioner on bail, over and above the conditions
imposed by it, the petitioner shall also be bound down by the
learned trial Court to appear before it to face the trial on each and
every day without fail. In the event the petitioner is found wanting
for non-compliance of any conditions imposed by the learned trial
Court, the concession of bail to be granted to the petitioner shall be
withdrawn at the instance of the prosecution's on application.
9. With this observation, the CRLMC is disposed of.
(S.S. Mishra)
Judge
Swarna
Location: High Court of Orissa
