Orissa High Court
Rajesh Kumar Jena And vs State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party on 20 January, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ABLAPL No.14091 of 2024
Rajesh Kumar Jena and ..... Petitioners
others
Represented By Adv. -
Himanshu Sekhar Mishra
-versus-
State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Smt. Sasmita Nayak,
ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
20.01.2025
Order No.
02. 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 438 of
Cr.P.C. by the Petitioners seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with
Jagannath Prasad P.S. Case No.242 of 2024, corresponding to S.T.
Case No.226 of 2024, pending in the court of learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar, for alleged commission of offences
punishable under Sections 452, 395, 387 of IPC read with Section
27 of the Arms Act.
4. It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioners that as per
the FIR allegation, one Kulu Bhuyan is the principal accused in this
case. He further contended that the above named Kulu Bhuyan,
along with other co-accused persons who have been arrested in the
meantime, have already been enlarged on bail by a Coordinate
Bench of this Court, vide a common judgment dated 14.11.2024 in
BLAPL Nos.7059 & 7712 of 2024. Learned counsel for the
Petitioners further submitted that as per the FIR allegation, the
principal accused Kulu Bhuyan and his associates threatened the
Informant and, demanding Dada Bati, tried to extort the Informant
by demanding a sum of Rs.2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores). He
further contended that so far as the present Petitioners are
concerned, there is no allegation of commission of any specific
overt act against the present Petitioners. Learned counsel for the
Petitioners further contended that the Petitioners have been
implicated in the present case by the principal accused. He further
submitted that the FIR has been lodged six months after the alleged
occurrence. On such grounds, learned counsel for the Petitioners
submitted that the Petitioners be enlarged on bail on any stringent
terms and conditions deemed proper by the Court.
5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand objected to
the release of the Petitioners on pre-arrest bail on the ground of
gravity and seriousness of the allegation. She further contended that
taking into consideration of the seriousness of the allegation made in
the FIR, the Petitioners should not be enlarged on pre-arrest bail.
6. Considering the nature of allegation, the 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, but subject to the verification of criminal
antecedents of the Petitioners. In the event, the Petitioners are
having more than one criminal antecedent, then this order shall
stand automatically revoked.
7. The release of the Petitioners shall also be subject to
following conditions:-
i) shall appear before the Trial Court on each and every
date fixed without fail, if not prevented by any sufficient
cause;
ii) shall not indulge in any similar criminal offences while
on bail;
iii) shall not harass, threaten or terrorize the Informant or
any of the prosecution witnesses;
iv) shall appear before the local Police Station once in a
fortnight for a period of three months preferably on a
'Sunday' in between 10:00 A.M. to 1:00 P.M.;
Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail.
8. It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioners
shall be subject to the Petitioners depositing cash security of
Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand) each before the learned Court
in seisin over the matter, which shall be kept in any Nationalized
Bank in interest bearing account initially for a period of one year
which will be renewable from time to time till conclusion of trial
and the same shall be abide by the final outcome of the trial of the
case.
9. Accordingly, the ABLAPL is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
(Aditya Kumar Mohapatra)
Judge
S.K. Rout
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
