The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.6191 of 2024 Sarat Chandra Mahanta ..... State Of Odisha -versus- ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. - Prasanna Kumar Mishra Opposite Party Represented By Adv. – G. Mohanty, SC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA ORDER 18.12.2024 Order No. 05. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. The bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 filed by the petitioner arising out of Mahabirod P.S. Case No. 108/2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No.331 of 2024 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Parjang is taken up into consideration. 3. The petitioner has been charge-sheeted under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, 1860 on the allegation of commission of murder of the deceased and also for causing disappearance of evidence. 4. It is the case of the prosecution that, the petitioner and the deceased had love affairs and due to such love affair between the petitioner and the deceased, the physical relationship between them was developed and Signature Not Verified
Legal Reasoning
Digitally Signed Signed by: UTKALIKA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 18-Dec-2024 19:12:17 Page 1 of 5. out of such physical relationship, the deceased was pregnant, to which, the petitioner was compelling for termination of her pregnancy, but when the deceased refused to terminate her pregnancy, then the petitioner committed her murder and after commission of murder, he (petitioner) hanged her dead body to project her death as suicidal one. 5. After death of the deceased, the mother of the deceased lodged F.I.R. against the petitioner and basing upon such F.I.R., case was registered on dated 12.05.2024 under Section 302 of the IPC, 1860 against the petitioner and investigation was started. During investigation, the petitioner was arrested on dated 13.05.2024 and was forwarded to the Court after being booked under Section 306 of the IPC, 1860 without booking him (petitioner) under Section 302 of the IPC, 1860 and thereafter, the Investigating Officer himself turned the case from an offence under Section 306 of the IPC, 1860 to 302 of the IPC, 1860 and submitted charge-sheet on dated 31.08.2024 under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, 1860 against the petitioner. 6.
Legal Reasoning
I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted for liberal consideration of his bail contending that, the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: UTKALIKA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 18-Dec-2024 19:12:17 Page 2 of 5. nature of investigation of the Investigating Officer is prevaricating from stage to stage, because initially he (I.O.) registered the case under Section 302 against the petitioner, but subsequently, the same I.O. arrested and forwarded petitioner to the Court after booking him (petitioner) under Section 306 of the IPC, 1860 excluding the investigation from an offence under Section 302 of the IPC, 1860, then later on submitted charge-sheet under Section 302 & 201 of the IPC, 1860 against the petitioner. So, by taking the above prevaricating nature of investigation of the Investigating Officer, the bail of the petitioner is required to be considered liberally by taking his period of detention into account, to which, learned Standing Counsel for the State objected contending that, when charge-sheet has already been submitted against the petitioner under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, 1860 for the commission of murder of the deceased, then he (petitioner) should not be allowed to go on bail. 8. When the petitioner is in jail custody since 13.05.2024 and when during the staying of the petitioner inside the jail, the investigation of the case has already been completed and when the main object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused during trial and when the presence of the petitioner during trial is not unsecured, as he is a local man having his house under the jurisdiction of Mahabirod P.S., in the district Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: UTKALIKA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 18-Dec-2024 19:12:17 Page 3 of 5. of Dhenkanal and when I.O. initially proceeded with the investigation for an offence under Section 302 of the IPC, 1860 and thereafter proceeded with the same under Section 306 of the IPC, 1860, but subsequently, turned the same to an offence under Section 302 of the IPC, 1860, then at this juncture, by taking the aforesaid nature of investigation of the I.O. and period of detention of the petitioner inside the jail and his less chance of absconding during trial into account, instead of rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner, it is felt proper to allow the petitioner to go on bail with stringent conditions looking to the interest of the prosecution. 9. Therefore, the bail application filed by the petitioner is allowed. 10. He (petitioner) is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin over the matter with conditions that :- (i) he (petitioner) shall not involve with similar nature of crime in future; (ii) he shall not terrorize, coerce, influence or threat any witnesses of the prosecution including the informant and her family members either directly or indirectly in any manner whatsoever at any stage of the proceeding of the case till the conclusion of the trial; Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: UTKALIKA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 18-Dec-2024 19:12:17 Page 4 of 5. (iii) he shall appear before the Trial Court personally in each date of adjournment of the case without fail; but in case of his failure to comply any of the aforesaid conditions, the court in seisin over the matter is authorized to cancel his bail order out-rightly without seeking any permission for the same from this Court. 11. Accordingly, the bail application filed by the
Decision
petitioner is disposed of finally. 12. It is made clear that, the Trial Court can never use the observations made in this bail order either in favour of prosecution or in favour of defence during trial, because, the entire observations made in this bail order are only for the purpose of bail. 13. Grant certified copy of this order to the petitioner on proper application. Utkalika (ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: UTKALIKA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 18-Dec-2024 19:12:17 Page 5 of 5.