Kumara Nag @ vs State Of Odisha
2025 Latest Caselaw 264 Ori

Orissa High Court

Kumara Nag @ vs State Of Odisha on 7 May, 2025

Author: S.K. Sahoo

Bench: S.K. Sahoo

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                CRLA No.486 of 2018

            Kumara Nag @                      .....        Appellant/Petitioner
            Kumaramani Bag
                                        Mrs.Rebatilata Nanda, Advocate


                                            -versus-
            State of Odisha                   .....       Respondent/Opp.
                                                          Party
                                        Mr. Sarat Kumar Pradhan, ASC
                                        Mr.Abhijit Pattnaik,
                                        Advocate for the Informant

                                     CORAM:
                       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
                THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIBA SHANKAR MISHRA
                                            ORDER

07.05.2025 Order No. I.A. No.1193 of 2018

09. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

This is an application under section 389(2) of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.

Heard.

Perused the impugned judgment.

The appellant-petitioner Kumara Nag @ Kumaramani Bag has been convicted for the offences punishable under sections 302/341/148/149 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for commission of the offence under section 302/149 of I.P.C., to undergo R.I. for one year for the offence under section 148, I.P.C., to undergo S.I. for one month for the offence under section 341/149, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for six months for the offence under

section 435/ 149, I.P.C. and all the sentences were directed to run concurrently by the learned Sessions Judge, Sambalpur vide judgment and order dated 07.05.2018 passed in S. T. No.129 of 2017.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced the custody certificate of the petitioner issued by Superintendent of District Jail, Balangir, which shows that the petitioner, as on 9.3.2023, has remained in custody for eleven years eleven months and twenty six days and by now he has remained in judicial custody for about fourteen years. The custody certificate is taken on record. Learned counsel further submits that there is no chance of early hearing of this appeal in the near future. She further submits that P.W.11 is the only witness, who has implicated the petitioner directly in the commission of the crime relating to the murder of the deceased, namely, Radheshyam Rai, but from his evidence, it would be evident that the petitioner came in front of the jeep and gave a signal to stop the vehicle in which the deceased was there and thereafter co- accused persons, namely, Mahatab Kharsel and Venketesh Mishra brought petrol from the nearby camp in two bottles and spread the same on the vehicle and also they poured petrol over the body of the deceased and then said Mahatab Kharsel threw a lighted match stick to the jeep and Venketesh Mishra threw one half burnt cigarette aiming towards the deceased and the vehicle suddenly got fire and after the deceased burnt by fire, he came out of the jeep and fell down on the ground. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that all the co-accused persons, who faced the trial along with the petitioner, have been acquitted of the charges and therefore, the conviction of the petitioner with the aid of section 149 of the Indian Penal Code under different offences are not sustainable in the eye of law. Accordingly, she submits that the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably considered.

Learned counsel for the State so also learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and placed the evidence of P.W.27, the informant in the case, the evidence of the doctor (P.W.8), who examined this petitioner and found there were burn injuries on his person and the evidence of the doctor (P.W.18), who conducted the post mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased and opined that the cause of death of the deceased was due to shock on account of extensive burn of about 95%.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of evidence adduced during trial, the nature of overt act attributed against the petitioner, the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody and absence of any chance of hearing of the appeal in the near future, we are inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

Let the appellant-petitioner be released on bail pending disposal of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with such terms and conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper with further condition that he shall not indulge himself in any criminal activities while on bail. Violation of any of the condition shall entail cancellation of bail.

Accordingly, the I.A. stands disposed of.

( S.K. Sahoo) Judge

(S.S. Mishra)

Basu

Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK Date: 08-May-2025 14:35:04