Sachidananda Balua ….. State of Odisha v. …
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 8818 of 2023 Sachidananda Balua ….. State of Odisha Vs. ….. Petitioner Mr. P.K. Nayak, Adv, on behalf of Mr. U.C. Jena, Adv. Opp. Party Ms. S. Mishra, A.S.C. CORAM: JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Decision
ORDER 17.01.2024 Order No. 02. (Through hybrid mode) 1. Perused the report dated 16.01.2024 of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Deogarh where it has been stated that out of 29 witnesses, 20 witnesses have already been examined and one has been declined by the prosecution and the case is posted to 06.02.2024 for hearing and summons have been issued to rest of the witnesses except I.O. for their examination. 2. Mr. P.K. Nayak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. U.C. Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. S. Mishra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State submit that as per the charge sheet there are 23 witnesses. 3. This is the second bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner in connection with Deogarh P.S. Case Page 1 of 5 No. 21 of 2019 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 30 of 2019 pending in the Court of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Deogarh where he is facing trial for commission of offences punishable under Sections 302/201 of IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 4. BLAPL No. 11126 of 2019 filed by the petitioner had been dismissed on 25.10.2021 directing for expediting the trial of the case as the petitioner was in custody since 13.02.2019. 5. Mr. P.K. Nayak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. U.C. Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 13.02.2019 and the case is based on circumstantial evidence as there is no eye witness to the occurrence. He further submits that the informant who is his sister has already been examined in the case and P.W.7 a neighbour has also been examined. He finally submits that in view of the right of the petitioner to speedy trial, the direction of this Court in BLAPL No. 11126 of 2019 for expediting the trial and absence of allegations that the delay in examination of witnesses is attributable to the petitioner, the prayer for bail of the petitioner may be sympathetically considered. 6. Ms. S. Mishra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating that the allegations against the Page 2 of 5 petitioner is that he has shot his own brother on account of a dispute regarding appointment on rehabilitation basis and sharing of pension of their late father and that he had earlier stated before a witness that the he would shoot the deceased and the deceased has died out of gunshot injuries and the petitioner has led to recovery of a pistol pursuant to his statement recorded under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act . She further submits that as the case is in the midst of trial, the petitioner may influence prosecution witnesses or abscond if he is released on bail. 7. In the case of Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb : (2021) 3 SCC 713, where the bail granted to an accused on the ground of delay had been challenged by the Union of India, the Supreme Court observed as follows : “16. This Court has clarified in numerous judgments that the liberty guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution would cover within its protective ambit not only due procedure and fairness but also access to justice and a speedy trial. In Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee Representing Undertrial Prisoners v. Union of India, it was held that undertrials cannot indefinitely be detained pending trial. Ideally, no person ought to suffer adverse consequences of his acts unless the same is established Page 3 of 5 before a neutral arbiter. However, owing to the practicalities of real life where to secure an effective trial and to ameliorate the risk to society in case a potential criminal is left at large pending trial, Courts are tasked with deciding whether an individual ought to be released pending trial or not. Once it is obvious that a timely trial would not be possible and the accused has suffered incarceration for a significant period of time, Courts would ordinarily be obligated to enlarge them on bail.” 8. Considering the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody, mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution and keeping in mind the decisions of the Supreme Court, as most of the material witnesses have been examined in the trial and in the absence of any allegation that the petitioner is responsible for the delay in examination of witnesses, I am of the view that the personal liberty of the petitioner should not be curtailed any further and he should be released on bail. 9. It is therefore ordered. 10. The petitioner- Sachidananda Balua be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the learned Court below in seisin over the matter, including the following conditions: (i) He will not commit any offence while on bail. Page 4 of 5 (ii) He will not threaten or try to influence prosecution witnesses or tamper with evidence. (iii) He will report before the I.I.C., Deogarh Police Station once in a week on every Monday between 1.00 p.m. to 3.00 p.m. till conclusion of trial. (iv) He will remain present in the trial Court on each date it if fixed for trial unless his appearance is dispensed with by the learned trial Court on that day. 11. Violation of any condition will entail in cancellation of bail. 12. The learned trial court should not be influenced by any observation in this order during trial, as such observations have been made only for the purpose of deciding the bail application. 13. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. 14. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. 15. A copy of this order be supplied to Ms. S. Mishra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for onward transmission to the I.I.C., Deogarh Police Station. Sukanta Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUKANTA KUMAR BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 08-Feb-2024 20:58:02 (Savitri Ratho) Judge Page 5 of 5