Orissa High Court
Ramakanta Karna & Another vs State Of Odisha .... Opposite Party on 4 March, 2025
Author: R.K. Pattanaik
Bench: R.K. Pattanaik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.9130 of 2024
Ramakanta Karna & another .... Petitioners
Mr. P. Mishra, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. P.K. Ray, AGA
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
04.03.2025
Order No.
03. 1. Heard Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners and
Mr. Ray, learned AGA for the State.
2. Instant petition under Section 483 BNSS is filed for release
of the petitioners on bail in connection with S.T. Case No.05 of
2024 pending in the file of learned Sessions Judge, Boudh
corresponding to Boudh P.S. Case No.107 of 2010 on the grounds
stated therein.
3. In course of hearing, Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the
petitioners refers to the copies of the depositions of the witnesses
examined during trial in S.T. Case No.5 of 2024 (a Split-Up Case)
and would submit that there is no direct evidence to link the
petitioners with the alleged incident, save and except suspicion,
which was entertained by the informant, namely, P.W. 1 and others.
The further submission is that four other accused persons have been
acquitted after full-fledged trial vide Annexures-7, 8 and 9. In
absence of any such evidence to connect the petitioner with the
alleged incident and considering the fact that the trial vis-à-vis the
other accused persons have ended in acquittal, the petitioners, who
are in judicial custody from 19th January, 2024, should be allowed
to go on bail. Recorded the objection of Mr. Ray, learned AGA for
the State, who, however, submits that he has not received the case
diary and other police papers. But, considering the submission of
Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners and the facts
narrated herein above, the Court is inclined to dispose of the
petition by the following order.
4. In fact, P.W.1 deposed about the alleged incident, however,
during cross-examination, he admitted of having no personal
knowledge regarding the murder of the deceased. The Court
perused the evidence of the other witnesses. In fact, the last witness
was examined in the month of October, 2024. The copies of the
depositions of eleven witnesses examined from the side of the
prosecution are referred to while claiming release of the petitioners.
In fact, it is made to understand that NBWs were issued in the year
2013-14 against the petitioners and they have been chargesheeted
after the judgment of the year, 2012 in S.T. No. 06 of 2011. The
submission is that the petitioners have been implicated entertaining
suspicion. Considering the above facts and orders of the acquittal
against four others, the Court is of the view that the petitioners,
who are in judicial custody for about a year by now, should be
granted bail subject to conditions.
5. Hence, it is ordered.
6. In the result, petition under Section 483 BNSS stands
allowed. Consequently, the petitioners are directed to be released
on bail in connection with S.T. Case No.05 of 2024 corresponding
to Boudh P.S. Case No.107 of 2010 subject to them furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand) each with one solvent
surety for the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions
Judge, Boudh, who shall be at liberty to impose such other suitable
conditions as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances
of the case besides the following, such as, they shall remain
physically present and attend the trial on each date of posting
without fail.
7. BLAPL stands disposed of.
8. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
Balaram
