The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.11799 of 2024 Pinku @ Tejraj @ Tejabanta Bag …. Petitioner Mr.Amit Prasad Bose, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opp. Party Mr. Tej Kumar, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Decision
ORDER 11.12.2024 1. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Patnagarh P.S. Case No.288 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1189 of 2023 for alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 376(1)/ 294/ 506 of the IPC, pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Patnagarh. The petitioner had approached the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patnagarh in Sessions Case No.06 of 2024 praying for grant of bail. Page 1 of 6 Order No. 02. The learned Court below vide its order dated 08.11.2024 rejected the bail application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying for enlargement on bail. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction from the petitioner, submits that, except the present bail application, no other bail application of the petitioner is pending in any other Court relating to the aforesaid F.I.R. 3. The prosecution case is that, on 09.11.2023, when the complainant had been to her field near Phalsabhuna, to attend the call of nature, at that time, the present petitioner came to her and forcibly hugged her from her back making her lay on the ground. When she shouted, the accused-petitioner abused her in obscene language and threatened to kill her and committed sexual assault on her. The petitioner also threatened her that, if she would disclose the matter to anybody, he would kill her and her family members. Hence, FIR. 4. Earlier, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing BLAPL No.14107 of 2023. This Court vide order dated 02.08.2024, although had rejected the bail application of the petitioner, however, observed as follows : Page 2 of 6 “3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 05.12.2023 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Patnagarh in BLAPL No.291 of 2023, whereby his bail plea had been rejected. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner hands up the copy of the charge sheet in the Court. Perusal of the statement recorded by the the prosecution under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of prosecutrix indicates that there is direct allegation against the petitioner regarding the commission of the crime. The victim, inter alia, in her statement has stated that on 09.11.2023 at 6 P.M. when she had gone outside to attend the call of nature, the present petitioner had forcibly pulled her from the back and raped her. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner is relying upon the medical documents which were conducted after five days of the incident. It reveals that there is no bodily injury sustained by the victim. Therefore, he submits that apparently there was no resistance from the side of the prosecutrix which leads to the only inference that this may be a case of consensual sex. 6. I am not inclined to entertain this petition at this stage, as the prosecutrix has not yet been examined by the Court below. Therefore, the petitioner is given liberty to renew his bail plea after the victim/ prosecutrix is examined by the Court below.” Pursuant to the aforementioned order, the victim has been examined as P.W.2. She, in her examination-in- chief has stated as under: “2. The occurrence took place one year back on 9th day of month of Kartika on Thursday around 6.00 p.m. On the relevant point of time I had been to our paddy field to attend the call of nature. At that time accused came from my back and embraced me, made me lay on the ground and committed forcible sexual intercourse upon me and threatened me to do away the life of my parents if I shout or disclose the matter before anybody or before family members. After the incident I ran to my house in crying and narrated about the incident before my neighbor Pramila Naik. Out of fear I did not disclose the matter before my family members but later on I gathered courage and disclosed the matter before my mother. After discussion in my family, I lodged FIR at Patnagarh Police station on Monday. One person scribed the FIR Page 3 of 6 as per my version. He read over and explained the contents of the FIR to me. After knowing the contents of the FIR to be true I put my LTI. This is the said F.I.R. already marked as Ext.P-1/P.W.1.” The statement made by the victim in her examination-in-chief is partly demolished in the cross-examination by the defence. 5. Mr. Bose, learned counsel for the petitioner has highlighted primarily two aspects, namely, the incident had taken place on 09.11.2023 and immediately after the incident, the victim had informed the incident to one Pramila Nayak. The allegations although are serious and known to Pramila Nayak immediately after commission, however, the F.I.R. was registered after four days, i.e., on 13.11.2023. Mr. Bose, learned counsel has further taken me to the medical evidence. The medical examination of the victim had taken place on 14.11.2023. From the medical evidence, it is apparent that, there is no bodily injury found on the victim and the doctor has also opined that, there is no sign or symptom of any recent sexual intercourse. 6. Relying upon the said medical evidence, Mr. Bose submitted that apparently there is no resistance on the part of the victim. Therefore, there is no external injury found on her body. He has extensively read out the cross-examination of the victim, who, inter alia, stated in her cross-examination that, she is a widow Page 4 of 6 and after the death of her husband, she has been staying in the village and she is known to the petitioner. 7. Regard being had to the aforementioned nature of the evidence, which has come on record and the fact that the petitioner has been in custody since more than a year, i.e. from 13.11.2023, I am inclined to enlarge accused-Petitioner on bail. 8. Hence, the accused-Petitioner is directed to be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter in the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it would deem just and proper, subject to the following additional conditions: (1) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial court without fail, on every date of hearing; (2) He shall not influence any of the witnesses related to this case in any manner whatsoever; and (3) He shall not commit any offence while on bail. In the event the petitioner is found wanted for violation of any of the bail conditions imposed by this Court or the trial Court even on a single occasion, the prosecution is at liberty to move appropriate application before the Court below for cancellation of the concession of bail granted by this Court. If such Page 5 of 6 application is filed, the trial Court should decide the application on its own merit. 9. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. Judge Subhasis (S.S. Mishra) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 12-Dec-2024 20:23:44 Page 6 of 6