Orissa High Court
Case Details
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 25-May-2025 10:01:56 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.2622 OF 2025 Kuna Barik …. Petitioner (s) Mr. Jyotirmaya Sahoo, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party (s) Mr. Pradipta Satpathy, ASC CORAM: DR.JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI Order No. 01. F.I.R./ PR No. 93
Decision
ORDER 15.05.2025 Dated Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name Sections Section 394 of the I.P.C. read with Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act. 14.06.2023 Suliapada S.T. Case of No.191 2024 pending in the court of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Baripada 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. Page 1 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 25-May-2025 10:01:56 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 3. The Petitioner being in custody in connection with Suliapada P.S. Case No.93 of 2023 corresponding to S.T. Case No.191 of 2024 pending in the court of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Baripada, registered for the alleged commission of offences under Section 394 of the I.P.C. read with Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, has filed this Petition for his release on bail. 4. The prosecution case in brief is that an FIR was lodged by one Swapneswar Singha, before the IIC, Suliapada P.S. alleging therein that on 13.06.2023 at about 5 PM while the informant was returning home after closing his Jewellary Shop on the way at Satyabhaya Jungle four unknown persons came by two bikes and on the point of gun snatched away mobile phone along with the bag which contains some valuable articles. Thereafter, at about 12 AM-12.30 AM they took the informant to his shop and took away some ornaments and cash of Rs.67,000/- from his shop. Hence, this Case. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the co-accused persons in this case have already been released on bail. Investigation in this case has already been completed and charge has been framed. The Petitioner was remanded in this Page 2 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 25-May-2025 10:01:56 case on 17.08.2023 while being in custody in Bhanjanagar Jail in connection with another case of Buguda Police Station. 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that right to have speedy trial is a fundamental right of a citizen. Hence, keeping a person in custody for such a long time without any trial is not justified and violative of his fundamental right. 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 adequate financial resources to incur the necessary 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. Page 3 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 25-May-2025 10:01:56 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 the large majority of the accused come from poorer and weaker sections of the society and are not versed with laws and after face the dearth of competent legal advice. Of course, in a given case, if an accused demands speedy trial and yet he is not given one, may be a relevant factor in his favour. But an accused cannot be disentitled from complaining of infringement of his right to speedy trial on the ground that he did not ask for or insist upon a speedy trial. 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. 1 (1981) 3SCC 671 2 SLP (Crl.) No.915 of 2023 Page 4 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 25-May-2025 10:01:56 9. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the Petitioner. 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 Petitioner in custody and the factum of release of the co- accused persons on bail, it is directed that the Petitioner 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:- i. The Petitioner shall appear before the local Police Station on every Monday between 10 A.M. to 1.00 P.M.; ii. The Petitioner shall not indulge himself in any criminal offence while on bail; iii. The Petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses in any manner; and iv. The Petitioner, after the onset of monsoon (between June, 2025 to August, 2025) shall plant 100 saplings 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 Petitioner or his family members. In the event that suitable land Page 5 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 25-May-2025 10:01:56 is unavailable, the Revenue Authority shall assist in identifying the land for plantation. Violation of any of the above conditions shall lead to 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 Petitioner has planted the saplings or not. 12. It is further directed that the Petitioner shall file an affidavit before the local Police Station, confirming that the saplings have been planted and that the Petitioner 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. 14. Accordingly, this BLAPL is disposed of. Judge (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) B. Jhankar Page 6 of 6