The High Court
Case Details
Order No. 01. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.3246 of 2025 Jitendra Kumar Patra ..…... Petitioner Mr. Satya Ranjan Mulia, Adv. -Versus- State of Odisha ………. Opposite Party Smt. J. Sahoo, ASC CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
Decision
ORDER 05.05.2025 Dated FIR No. Police Station Case No. and Courts’ Name Sections 0116 08.03.2023 Jagatpur S.T. Case No.123 of 2024 arising out of P.S. Case No.116 of 2023 pending in the court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack Sections 294/506/354/307 /323/302/34 of IPC 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsels for the Parties. 3. The Petitioner is in custody in connection with S.T. Case No.123 of 2024 arising out of P.S. Case No.116 of 2023 pending 2 in the court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack, registered for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 294/506/354/307/323/302/34 of IPC has filed this petition for his release on bail. 4. The prosecution case, in brief is that the informant namely Umesh Gupta presented a written report before the LLC of Jagatpur Police Station alleging therein that on 08.03.2023 while his family members were playing Holi, accused Pintu came there and misbehaved his female members. When the elder brother of the informant protested it, the said accused left the spot by abusing them. Thereafter, he along with other accused persons again came to the spot, assaulted the family members of informant and one Jogendra Sao. The accused persons also in order to commit murder assaulted one Badri Prasad by means of an iron rod to his head and he became senseless. Later the said injured Badri Prasad died in the hospital. Pursuant to the written information of the informant, the case was registered and after completion of investigation, the charge sheet was submitted against the accused persons. Page 2 of 7 3 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was not directly involved in this case. He further submits that the Petitioner is in custody since 10.03.2023. He further submits that 1 to 7 witnesses have been examined and the material witnesses turned hostile. Hence, he submits that the Petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 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 the necessary expenditure needed for improving the administrative and judicial apparatus with a view to ensuring speedy trial." resources financial incur to Page 3 of 7 4 7. He further argues that the period of long incarceration suffered, which entitle the Petitioners 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 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 1 (1981) 3SCC 671 2 SLP (Crl.) No.915 of 2023 Page 4 of 7 5 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 vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the Petitioners. 10. Without going into the merit of the case and based on the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the period of detention of the Petitioner in custody, 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 trial court on each date of posting of the case; ii. the Petitioner shall appear before the local police station once a week on Monday in between 10 A.M. to 12.00 Noon till the end of trial. Page 5 of 7 6 iii. the Petitioner shall not indulge himself in any criminal offence while on bail; and iv. the Petitioner shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in any manner. v. The Petitioner, after the onset of monsoon, shall plant 200 saplings of local varieties, such as mango, neem, tamarind, etc., around the Tangi Police Station In the event that suitable land 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. 8. The District Nursery/D.F.O. shall extend the helping hand by supplying the saplings to the Petitioner and the Revenue Authority shall assist the Petitioner in identifying the land for plantation of the saplings around the Tangi Police Station. If the land is not available, the Petitioner to approach the Revenue Authority for identifying the land for plantation and the Revenue Authority shall do the needful. Page 6 of 7 7 9. 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. 10. It is further made clear that the Petitioner shall file an affidavit after plantation of the saplings before the local Police Station assuring that they shall maintain those plants for two years. 11. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. Judge (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Sumitra Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMITRA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 14-May-2025 19:31:00 Page 7 of 7