The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 2288 of 2025 Arun Munda & Ors. ..…... Petitioner Mr. Sandeep Raj Panda, Adv. -Versus- State of Odisha ………. Opposite Party Ms. Gayatri Patra, ASC CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI ORDER 23.04.2025 Dated FIR No. Police Station Sections No. Case and Courts’ Name Order No. 01. 147 15.10.2023 Pandapada S.T. Case of Sections 302 of IPC No.26 2024 in pending the court of learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 25-Apr-2025 19:18:38 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard learned counsel for the Parties. 2 3. The petitioners, who are presently in custody in connection with Pandapada P.S. Case No. 147 of 2023, corresponding to S.T. Case No. 26 of 2024 pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar, have filed the present application seeking bail. The case pertains to allegations under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. The case of the prosecution is that, based on a written report lodged by the informant, Rahash Munda, at Pandapada Police Station, it is alleged that on 15.10.2023 at around 3:25 PM, he reported the unnatural death of his elder father, Rama Munda, who was employed as a daily labourer. According to the informant, his elder father was last seen loitering in the village on the previous day around 10:00 AM, as observed by several villagers. On the morning of 15.10.2023, at approximately 9:00 AM, the informant received information that his elder father was found dead near Baghabindhasahi at the foothills of Hatitangar Hill in village Kamarguda. Upon reaching the spot, the informant found the body lying naked, bearing visible bleeding injuries. His half-pant and vest were found discarded at a short distance from the body. It is alleged that an unknown person or persons committed the murder by assaulting the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 25-Apr-2025 19:18:38 deceased. Page 2 of 7 3
Legal Reasoning
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a simple and innocent individual who has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 17.10.2023 and that the Investigating Officer has already submitted the charge sheet on 13.02.2024. Accordingly, it is prayed that the petitioner be released on bail. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has consistently held that the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right guaranteed to every citizen under Article 21 of the Constitution. Therefore, continued incarceration of the petitioner for an extended period without conclusion of trial is unjustified and amounts to a violation of his fundamental rights. The importance of speedy trial has been emphasized in the case of Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. vs Home Secretary, State of Bihar, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has iterated that: "Speedy trial is, as held by us in our earlier judgment dated 26th February, 1979, an essential ingredient of 'reasonable, fair and just" procedure guaranteed by Article 21 and it is the constitutional obligation of the State to device such a procedure as would ensure speedy trial to the accused. The State cannot be permitted to deny the constitutional right of speedy trial to the accused on the ground that the State has no the necessary adequate resources financial incur to Page 3 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 25-Apr-2025 19:18:38 4 expenditure needed for improving the administrative and judicial apparatus with a view to ensuring speedy trial." 7. He further argues that the period of long incarceration suffered, which entitle the Petitioner for grant of bail. Right to Speedy trial is a fundamental right of an under trial prisoner and this observations have been resonated, time and again, in several judgments including that of Kadra Pahadiya & Ors. v. State of Bihar 1wherein it has been held that the obligation of the State or the complainant, as the case may be, to proceed with the case with reasonable promptitude. Particularly in a country like ours, where a significant majority of the accused belong to economically and socially disadvantaged sections of society and often lack awareness of legal rights or access to competent legal assistance, the right to a speedy trial assumes even greater importance. While in a given case, an accused person's express demand for a speedy trial may weigh in their favour, the absence of such a demand cannot be used to deny or dilute their right. An accused cannot be deprived of the protection guaranteed under the right to a speedy trial merely because they did not expressly assert or insist upon it. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 25-Apr-2025 19:18:38 1 (1981) 3SCC 671 Page 4 of 7 5 8. The Supreme Court has also held in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi)2 that incarceration has further deleterious effects where the accused belongs to the weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the event of an acquittal, the loss to the accused is irreparable), and ensure that trials - especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily. 9. Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioners are alleged to be involved in the commission of a heinous offence of murder. Accordingly, he strongly opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 10. Without going into the merit of the case and based on the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of detention of the Petitioners in custody, it is directed that the Petitioners be released on bail in the aforesaid case with some stringent terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the learned court in seisin over the matter with further conditions that:- Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 25-Apr-2025 19:18:38 2 SLP (Crl.) No.915 of 2023 Page 5 of 7 6 i. the Petitioners shall appear before the trial court on each date of posting of the case; ii. the Petitioners shall not indulge themselves in any criminal offence while on bail; and iii. the Petitioners shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in any manner. iv. The Petitioners, after the onset of monsoon, shall plant 100 saplings each of local varieties, such as mango, neem, tamarind, etc., around their village on government land, community land, or private land in the possession of the petitioners or their family members. In the event that suitable land is unavailable, the Revenue Authority shall assist in identifying land for the plantation. Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail. 11. The I.I.C. of the concerned police station, in coordination with the local Forest Officer, shall monitor whether the Petitioners have planted the saplings as required. 12. It is further directed that the Petitioners shall file an affidavit before the local police station, confirming that the saplings have Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 25-Apr-2025 19:18:38 Page 6 of 7 7 been planted and that the petitioners will maintain those plants for a period of two years. 13. The District Nursery/District Forest Officer (D.F.O.) shall extend assistance to the petitioner by supplying the necessary saplings.
Decision
14. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. Judge Murmu ( Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 25-Apr-2025 19:18:38 Page 7 of 7