Sukra Oram v. State Of Odisha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.7574 of 2021 Sukra Oram ....
Petitioner Mr. Bijaya Kumar Ragada, Advocate -versusThe State of Odisha ....
Opposite Party Mr. Karunakar Nayak, Additional Government Advocate for State
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K.MOHAPATRA
ORDER
12.01.2022 Order No.
03.
1.
This matter is taken up through Video Conferencing mode. 2.
Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the case diary and other relevant papers.
3.
This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the Petitioner for bail in connection with Chandiposh P.S. Case No.64 of 2017, corresponding to G.R. Case No.689 of 2017 in S.T. Case No.29 of 2018, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bonai, for commission of alleged offence under Section 302 I.P.C.
4.
Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that there are no eye witnesses to the occurrence and basing upon the circumstantial evidence, the prosecution is trying to entangle the present petitioner in the case.
5.
Mr.Karunakar Nayak, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State is not disputed to the fact that Petitioner is in
// 2 // jail custody since 10.12.2017. He further submits that in the event this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on regular bail, stringent conditions be imposed on him.
6.
Considering the nature of allegations and the fact that Petitioner is in jail custody since the date of his arrest, i.e. from 10.12.2017 and there is no chance of early conclusion of trial, I am inclined to release the Petitioner on bail in the above case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand) with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin of the matter subject to further conditions that he will not tamper the evidence or threat the witnesses to the occurrence and he shall cooperate in the trial of the case and shall appear before the trial court on each date that would be fixed by the trial court. Any violation of the conditions would entail cancellation of bail granted by this Court.
7.
With the above direction, the BLAPL is accordingly allowed.
8.
As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID -19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a print out of the order available in the High Court's website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned Advocate, in the manner prescribed vide Court's Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020, modified by Court's Notice No.4798, dated 15th April, 2021, and Court's Office Order circulated vide Memo Nos.514 and 515 dated 7th January, 2022.
(A.K. Mohapatra) Judge U.K.Sahoo