The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.6350 of 2022 Ashok Bishoyi …. Petitioner State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. B.R. Tripathy, Advocate -versus- Mr. M.K. Mohanty, A.S.C. CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 04.05.2023 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Perused the F.I.R., case diary and other relevant documents as well as statements of the witnesses and the medical examination report of the victim. 3. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Kodala has submitted a status report of the trial. On perusal of the status dated 26.04.2023 which was sent along with copies of deposition of the witness, it appears that out of 13 witnesses, seven witness have already been examined including the victim and the informant. 4. This is an application under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code. // 2 // 5. The Petitioner is an accused in S.T. Case No.06 of 2022 arising out of Polasara P.S. Case No.100 of 2020 pending in the court of learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Kodala for commission of offence punishable under Section 294, 506, 507, 450, 376(2N) of Indian Penal Code and read with Section-66D, 66E, 67(A) IT Act. 6. In the present bail application is the 2nd journey of the petitioner to this Court. Earlier bail application has been withdrawn by the learned counsel for the Petitioner with liberty to move the trial court afresh after commitment of the case. Accordingly, that dues move the trial court for bail after commitment of the case. Such application having been rejected then the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. 7. Prosecution story as narrated in the bail application is as follows:- That the brief factual backdrop of the case is that on 14.05.2020 at 6:40 P.M. the complainant appeared at P.S. and reported the matter that on 12.05.2020 the present petitioner threatened the complainant over phone to keep physical relation with him when he will reach in his village, otherwise he will kill her in life and viral obscene necked photo and video of the complainant. On 18.04.2020 the complainant came to know that the present petitioner viral her necked photo and videos. Since 1 and half year back in absence of the family members, the cousin brother of the complainant committed rape against her consent on the point of knife and recorded the rape scene and threatened and assaulted her. Repeatedly the petitioner committed sexual harassment with her showing her obscene photos and he threatened her to show her // 3 // necked videos and photos to her through video calling, otherwise he will kidnap and kill her younger brother. When it became unbearable the complainant told the whole thing to her parents. After caste meeting the family members of the present petitioner takes to the complainant to their house and kept her for 4 days but the family members of the Petitioner did not provide her food and assaulted her and tried to kill her in life. The complainant returned to her house after the petitioner left from his house for out of State. Now the Petitioner is still viral her video. For which has resulted the F.I.R. against the present petitioner for alleged commission of offence U/s.- 294, 506, 507, 450, 376(2N) of IPC and read with Section-66D, 66E, 67(A) IT Act, vide Polasara P.S. Case No.100 of 2020. 8. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner in custody since 13.06.2021. He further submitted that some of the witness having been examined in the meantime including the victim. On perusal of referring to the statement of the victim, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the victim is a major girl and further the consent of the victim cannot be ignored in the facts of the present case. He further submitted that the allegation under the provision of the IT Act are concerned, the Petitioner has been sufficiently punished by custodial detention for almost two years with regard to allegation under Section 376(2N) is concerned. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Petitioner and the accused are related as cousins. Further the Petitioner is a next door neighbour of the victim. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted so far the medical report is concerned there is nothing with regard to the sexual intercourse as the Doctor has categorically opined that there is no evidence have been recently // 4 // sexual intercourse. Therefore, the Petitioner is concerned it is also submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that he is a married man, having children as a result of which the entire family is suffering. In view of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail. 9. Leaned Additional Standing Counsel for the State on the other hand opposes the bail application filed by the Petitioner on the ground that the allegations made against the Petitioner is serious in nature and he further submitted that the accused has committed a heinous crime by circulating the necked picture of the victim in the social media. Therefore, learned Addl. Standing Counsel submitted that no leniency should be shown to the Petitioner. He further submitted that the trial is in advanced stage. Therefore, the release of the Petitioner is caused for the delay in disposal of the trial. On such ground learned counsel for the State submitted that the bail application be rejected at this juncture. 10. Considering such submission made by learned counsels appearing for the parties and upon a conspectus surrounding facts and circumstances further taking into consideration the statement of the witness and the deposition of the witness which were sent to this Court by the Trial court and further keeping in view the custodial detention of the Petitioner, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.40,000/- (rupees fourty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter subject to the following conditions:- I. The Petitioner shall not be involved in any // 5 // offence of similar nature; II. he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or try to threaten or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever; III. he shall not make any default in attending the court during trial; IV. he shall appear before the concerned Police Station once in a month preferably on ‘Sunday’ in between 10.00 A.M. to 1.00 P.M. till conclusion of trial; V. He shall appear before the Trial Court on each and every date without fail. Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail. 11. The Bail Application is accordingly disposed of. 12. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Date: 2023.05.05 18:54:55 +05'30'