The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLA No.1019 of 2024 1) Bijay Behera 2) Prasanta Behera ..... Appellants Represented By Adv. - Purna Chandra Moharana 1) State Of Odisha 2) Muna Behera -versus- ..... Respondents Represented By Adv. - Abhisiddhanta Sahoo, A.mishra Ms. B.K. Sahu, AGA
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Decision
ORDER 30.11.2024 Order No. 04. 1. 2. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. This is an appeal under Section 14-A of SC & ST (PA) Act, 1989, which has been preferred by the appellants against an order of rejection of their bail passed on dated 18.06.2024 by the learned Special Judge, Puri in Special G.R. Case No.113 of 2024. 3. Heard from the learned counsel for the appellants, learned AGA for the State and the learned counsel for the informant. 4. The appellants have been implicated under Sections 341/323/294/326(A)/506/307/34 read with Section 3(1)(r)(s) & 2(va) of SC & ST (PoA) Act on the allegations alleged against them that, on 14.05.2024 at about 5.30 PM evening, the females of their sahi had been to the house of the appellant No.1 (Bijaya Behera) to ask him about the reason for non-attending the Sahi meeting, but, as per the previous plan of the appellants, they (appellants) assaulted Page 1 of 5. Parbati Behera first by means of Bhujali and then, Sarathi Behera, Jamuna Behera, Champa Behera, Dulei Behera and Amit Behera throwing Acid upon them and by the result of which, they all sustained injuries. They (appellants) also abused them (injureds) in obscene languages touching their caste as they (injureds) belong to Scheduled Caste community, for which, one Muna Behera lodged FIR on its next day before the IIC, Talabania P.S alleging the aforesaid allegations against the appellants and basing upon which, a case vide Talabania P.S Case No.85 of 2024 was registered and investigation was started. During investigation, the appellants were arrested on 15.05.2024 and were forwarded to the Court after being booked with the aforesaid offences and since then, they (appellants) are in custody. 5. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted for liberal consideration of the their bail contending that, they (appellants) are in custody since 15.05.2024 for about more than 6 months and in the meantime, the investigation of the case has already been completed and the chargesheet has already been submitted on 12.09.2024 by the investigating officer keeping the investigation open under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C. and there was a counter case for the same incident against the injureds and others on the basis of the FIR lodged by the appellant No.1 (Bijaya Behera) vide Talabania P.S. Case No.86 of 2024 alleging attempt to commission of murder of the appellants by them (injureds and others) and in that counter case, the injureds and their co-accused persons have already been allowed to go on bail by the Order of this Hon’ble Court vide Order dated 25.07.2024 passed in ABLAPL No.7261 of 2024, to which, the learned AGA for the State as well as the learned counsel for the Page 2 of 5. informant objected contending that, in these heinous nature of allegations, they (appellants) should not be allowed to go on bail, because, they (appellants) are the principal culprits of the alleged incident and in case of their release on bail, there is every possibility of threat to the lives of the injureds. 6. When the appellants are in jail custody since 15.05.2024 and when in the meantime the appellants have already stayed inside the custody for about more than 6 months and when during the staying of the appellants inside the jail, the investigation of the case has already been completed and when the presence of the appellants before the investigating officer for the purpose of any further investigation may not be required, as the investigating officer had not prayed before the Court for bringing the appellants on remand for their any further custodial interrogation and when the presence of the appellants during trial of the case is not unsecured as they (appellants) are the local men under the jurisdiction of Talabania P.S. and when for the self-same incident, there is a counter case vide Talabania P.S. Case No.86 of 2024 against the injureds and others on the basis of the FIR lodged by the appellant No.1 Bijaya Behera on the allegation of attempting to commit murder of the appellants and when the alleged incident is the outcome of the fault of both the sides, as, there is a case and counter case against each other and when it is the guideline of Apex Court as per the ratio of decision reported in (2003) 25 OCR 743: Bashishth Singh and another Vrs. State of Bihar that, when there is case and counter case, then both parties are to be released on bail then, at this juncture, by taking the above factors into account, I find no justification to disallow the prayer for bail of the appellants. For which, instead of rejecting their appeal, it is felt proper to allow them (appellants) to Page 3 of 5. go on bail with stringent conditions looking to the future safety and security of the injureds, witnesses as well as interest of the prosecution. 7. 8. Hence, the CRLA filed by the appellants is allowed. The order of rejection of bail of the appellants passed on dated 18.06.2024 by the learned Special Judge, Puri in Special G.R. Case No.113 of 2024 is set aside. 9. They (appellants) are 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 Court in seisin over the matter with conditions that:- (i) they (appellants) shall not involve with similar nature of crime in future. (ii) they (appellants) shall appear before the trial court personally on each date of adjournment of the case without fail till the conclusion of trial. (iii) they (appellants) shall not terrorize, coerce, influence or threat to the injureds and their family members and the witnesses either directly or indirectly in any manner whatsoever at any stage of the trial of the case but, in case of their failure to comply any one of the aforesaid conditions, the learned trial court is authorized to cancel their respective bail orders outrightly without seeking any permission from this Court for the same. 10. Grant urgent certified copy of this order to the appellants on proper application. Page 4 of 5. 11. Accordingly, the CRLA filed by the appellants is disposed of finally. Rati Ranjan ( ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RATI RANJAN NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack, India. Date: 30-Nov-2024 15:54:01 Page 5 of 5.