The High Court
Case Details
Order No. 03. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLA No.80 of 2022 Shyama Sahu another …. Appellants Mr. Satyabrata Panda, Advocate State of Odisha and another …. Respondents -versus-
Legal Reasoning
Mr. K.K. Nayak, A.S.C. CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
Decision
ORDER 19.04.2022 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. This is an application under Section 14(A) of Schedule Caste and Scheduled Tribe (PoA) Act. 3. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 10.01.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Padampur in Special G.R. Case No.65 of 2021 arising out of Gaisilat P.S. Case No.147 of dated 01.10.2021 for alleged commission of offence under Sections 147/148/149/506/294/427/307/395/376- D/336/458/354/354-B, I.P.C. read with Sections 3(1)(s)/3(2)(v)/3 (2)(va) of the S.C. and S.T. (PoA) Act. 4. Heard learned counsel for the Appellants as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Respondents. 5. On being noticed on the informant, the informant appears in person in Court today through virtual mode and objected the prayer for // 2 // bail of the appellants. 6. The prosecution case, as revealed from the F.I.R., is that after Rath Dutiya son of the informant, namely, Prasanta Kumbar and the daughter of Thurli Sahu, namely, Nandini Sahu were found missing. Thurli Sahu suspected that her daughter was taken away by the son of the victim and a meeting was convened in the village regarding this matter. In the said meeting, the victim was forced to declare her son as ‘TYAJYAPUTRA’ and out of pressure, the victim declared her son as ‘TYAJYAPUTRA’. On the occurrence date i.e. 11.08.2021 at about 6.00 P.M., Umakanta Sahu, Nihar Sahu, Pritam Sahu, Shyama Sahu, Bablu Khamari, Monu Panda, Khedu Sahu, Jogi Khamari, Kamala Sahu, Thurli Sahu, Geeta Sahu, Betikhai Sahu came armed with various deadly weapons like thenga, badi, axe, Bhujali, etc. and came to the house of the victim with a plan to kill the family members of the victim and to commit rape on her. They started abusing the victim in obscene words taking the name of her caste and also uttered very obscene languages and also threatened her to kill. Out of fear to her life and chastity, the victim remained inside the house after locking the door. To satisfy their ill intention, Umakanta Sahu, Nihar Sahu, Shyama Sahu and Bablu Khamari broken the door and forcibly entered inside the house of the victim. Umakanta Sahu dragged the victim by holder her hair to the verandah. All the nine male persons named above surrounded the victim. The victim cried and requested to leave her. In spite of that, Umakanta, Nihar, Bablu, Pritam, Shyama and Mony dragged the victim and lay her down. With an intention to kill, Nihar Sahu gave a bnlow with the help of a bhujali on the chest of the victim. When the victim tried to save her, the blow fell on the left rib causing bleeding injury. Then Nihar Sahu placed the bhujali on the neck of the victim and threatened her saying to remain calm and not to protest. Then Umakanta Sahu committed rape on her. After Umakanta Sahu, the // 3 // other persons, namely, Nihar Sahu, Bablu Khamari, Pritam Sahu, Shyama Sahu, Monu Panda and other committed gang rape on the victim. While the victim was lying in semiconscious condition, Khedu Sahu, Jogi Khamari, Kamala Sahu, Geeta Sahu Metikhai Sahu, etc. assaulted the victim with the help of badi, thenga, kicks and fist blows on the stomach, chest, head and private part of the victim. The victim was unable to stand due to above acts. Then the perpetrators had taken away one gold chain (2 bhari), gold KACHJIMALI(1 bhari), gold GOTIMALI, golden set (6 MASA), cash of Rs.5,000/- and one mobile of Rs.10,000/-. They also forcibly taken away 20 goats (worth Rs.2,00,000/-). After half an hour, the victim managed to crawl to the house of Manbodh Deep, who is the neighbor of the victim and lost her sense there. After this occurrence, the above noted persons set fire to the house of Bhagaban Kumbhar reported about burning of his house to Gaisilat Police and police came to the spot. Police rescued the victim from the house of Manbodh Deep in a very precarious condition and sent her to Padampur Hospital for treatment. 7. Learned counsel for the appellants does not want to press the bail application of the Appellant No.1-Shyama Sahu with liberty to renew his prayer for bail after examination of the victim before the trial court. 8. So far as Appellant No.2-Premanand Sahu is concerned, learned counsel for the Appellants submits that the appellant is in custody since 29.08.2021. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Appellant No.2-Premanand Sahu was not named in the F.I.R. It is also submitted that no offence is made out under the alleged under Sections. He also submits that there is no scope for absconding or fleeing from the hands of the justice and that the Appellant No.2 is a local man. 9. Learned counsel for the State-Respondent, on the other hand, submits that the allegations made against the Appellants are serious in // 4 // nature and that both the appellants had assaulted the informant. He further submits that considering the gravity of offence and seriousness of the allegation, the prayer for bail at the behest of the Appellant No.2 may be rejected. 10. Having heard learned counsel for the Appellant as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Respondent and considering the nature of accusation, seriousness and the gravity of offence as well as custodial detention of the Appellant, I am inclined to release the Appellant No.2-Premanand Sahu on bail. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 10.01.2022 passed in CRLA No.80 of 2022 is hereby set aside. 11. Let the Appellant No.2-Premanand Sahu be released on bail in the aforesaid case subject to furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (rupees thirty thousand) with two local sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter with further conditions as may deem just and proper by the learned court in seisin over the matter in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 12. With the aforesaid observation, the Appeal is allowed without any cost. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. Jagabandhu ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge