The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLA No.746 of 2024 Ranjan Kumar Sahu ..... Appellant State Of Odisha -versus- ..... Represented By Adv. – K. P. Dash Respondent Represented By Adv. – G. S. Nayak T.K. Acharya, ASC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA ORDER 20.12.2024 Order No. 06. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of SC & ST (PoA) Act, 1989, which has been preferred by the appellant against an order of rejection of his bail passed on dated 20.07.2024 by the learned Special Judge-cum-Additional Sessions Judge, Balliguda, Kandhamal in C.T. Case No.53 of
Legal Reasoning
2024 arising out of Balliguda P.S. Case No.44 of 2024. 3. Heard from the learned counsel for the appellant, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant/victim as well as the informant/victim. 4. It is the case of the prosecution against the appellant that, the informant/victim is the General Secretary of Adibasi Page 1 of 6. Morcha, Kandhamal BJP and she (victim) was an eligible MLA candidate of Balliguda constituency. The appellant is also one member of BJP party. On dated 21.06.2023, the victim, appellant along with others had been to Balimela under Belghar police station to attend a party programme in a four wheeler and while they were returning from Balimela, on the way, near Tumudibandha, the other party members got down from the vehicle and thereafter, the victim/informant and the appellant remained in that vehicle and came towards Balliguda and on the way, the appellant provided cold drinks to the victim/informant and sometime thereafter, the victim became unconscious, then taking such opportunity, the appellant raped the victim and threatened her (victim) if either she will disclose about the said matter before anybody or complain at police station, then she (victim) will not get party ticket for MLA and if necessary, he (appellant) will kill her (victim), then, the appellant left the victim near her house and since then, the appellant kept physical relationship with the victim continuously time and again giving her assurance to provide party ticket for MLA, but due to such physical relationship of the appellant with her (victim), she (victim) came to know that, she has become pregnant, then she (victim) went to the house of the appellant, wherein mother of the appellant abused her (victim) in obscene languages touching her caste as Kandhuni, as the appellant belong to General Caste community and some days thereafter, the appellant and his wife also abused her (victim) in obscene languages touching Page 2 of 6. her caste and also assaulted her giving fist and kick blows and thereafter, she (victim) lodged F.I.R on dated 22.02.2024 before the I.I.C., Balliguda Police Station alleging the aforesaid allegations against the appellant. Basing upon such F.I.R., Balliguda P.S. Case No.44 of 2024 was registered under Sections 376(2)(n), 313, 506, 323, 294 and 34 of IPC, 1860 read with under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(l)(s), 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of S.C &S.T (P.O.A) Act, 1989 against the appellant and investigation was started. During investigation, the appellant was arrested on dated 24.02.2024 and was forwarded to the Court after being booked with the aforesaid offences and since then, he (appellant) is in custody. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted for liberal consideration of his bail contending that, present age of the victim is 44 years as per her Aadhaar Card and she is a well educated lady, because, she has passed M.A., that too, she (victim) is the General Secretary of Adibasi BJP Morcha of Kandhamal BJP, for which, she (victim) is not an ordinary village lady and the alleged sexual intercourses between the appellant and victim, if any, cannot be termed as unconsensual and the appellant is in custody since 24.02.2024 for about more than 10 months and in the meantime, during the staying of the appellant inside the jail, the investigation of the case has already been completed, to which, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State and learned counsel for the victim/informant and victim herself vehemently objected contending that, in case of release of the appellant on bail, Page 3 of 6. there is every possibility of threat to the life of the victim/informant, because the appellant is trying to kill her and trial of the case has not been started as yet, for which, he (appellant) should not be allowed to go on bail. 6. When the appellant is in custody since 24.02.2024 for about more than 10 months and when during the staying of the appellant inside the jail, the investigation of the case has already been completed and when as per the allegation of the informant/victim, there was continuous sexual relationship between the appellant and victim since 21.06.2023 upto 15.02.2024 for about one year and five months and when the victim and appellant are aged about 44 years and 34 years respectively and when the presence of the appellant during trial is not unsecured, as his house is under the jurisdiction of Daringbadi Police Station in the district of Kandhamal and when the main object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused during trial, then at this juncture, by taking the above factors into account, it is felt proper to allow the appellant to go on bail with stringent conditions after setting aside the order of rejection of his bail passed on dated 20.07.2024 by the learned Special Judge-cum-Additional Sessions Judge, Balliguda, Kandhamal. 7. 8. Hence, the appeal preferred by the appellant is allowed. The impugned order of rejection of bail of the appellant passed on dated 20.07.2024 by the learned Special Judge-cum- Additional Sessions Judge, Balliguda, Kandhamal in C.T. Case No.53 of 2024 is set aside. Page 4 of 6. 9. He (appellant) 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 shall not involve with similar nature of crime in future; (ii) he shall appear before the Trial Court personally on each date of adjournment of the case without fail till the conclusion of its trial; (iii) he shall not terrorize, coerce, influence or threat any witnesses of the prosecution including the informant, her family members either directly or indirectly in any manner whatsoever at any stage of the proceeding of the case; but in case of his failure to comply any one of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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. 10. Accordingly, the CRLA filed by the appellant is disposed of finally with a copy to the IIC, Balliguda P.S., Kandhamal for his information and report before the Court in seisin over the matter, in case of violation of any of the conditions by the appellant for taking necessary action as per law. Page 5 of 6. 11. It is made clear that, the Trial Court can never use the observations made in this CRLA either in favour of prosecution or in favour of defence during trial, because, the entire observations made in this CRLA are only for the purpose of bail. 12. Grant certified copy of this order to the appellant 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: 20-Dec-2024 20:16:31 Page 6 of 6.