The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.11948 of 2024 Ajaya Kumar Das @ Ajay Das …. Petitioner Mr. K.K. Panigrahi, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha …. Opp. Party
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Tej Kumar, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Decision
Order No. ORDER 13.12.2024 02. 1. This is an application under Section-439 Cr.P.C. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Bari Ramachandrapur P.S. Case No.70 of 2024 corresponding to C.T. Sessions Case No.224 of 2024 for the alleged commission of the offences under Sections-376(2)(n)/387/419/420/506 of the IPC read with Section 66D & 66E of the I.T. Act pending in the Court of the learned Ad hoc Additional District & Sessions Judge (FTSC), Jajpur. The petitioner had moved an application before learned trial Court for grant of bail. The learned trial Court vide order dated 20.11.2024 rejected his application. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. praying for enlargement on bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the plea of bail of the petitioner is not pending before any other Court except the present one. 4. The prosecution case is that on 28.01.2024, the victim lodged a written report before the Bari Ramachandrapur Police Station alleging therein that she had married to one Susanta Kumar Pradhan in the year 2022. After marriage, she had been to Bhuabeswar for searching of a job. There she met with the petitioner and his wife. Thereafter, the accused gave her drugs and kept physical relationship with the victim and captured her naked photographs without her knowledge. In order to provide a Government job at Bhubaneswar, the petitioner took Rs.69,000/- from the victim through Google Pay. After few days, when the victim asked the petitioner about her job, the petitioner started black mailing her by showing her naked photographs and again kept physical relationship with her many times. The petitioner had taken Rs.8,00,000/- and gold ornaments from her. Now the petitioner threatens her that if she will not give money, he will viral those obscene photos. Hence, the F.I.R. 5. The prosecutrix in the present case has already been examined as P.W.1 on 8.11.2024 and she is aged about 29 years. She in her examination-in-chief, has stated as under: “2. The occurrence took place 8 months prior to lodging of FIR. After my marriage 1 came to Bhubaneswar in search of a job. While so searching for a job, I came in contact with accused Ajaya Das and the accused assured me to get me engaged in a job. I also gave my bio data to accused Ajay Das and accused called me to appear in an interview to get the job. Accused accompanied me to that interview. On the way he offered me Cold drink. I consumed that Cold drink and I could not know anything after consumption of said Cold drink. When I regain discovered myself inside a room. The accused had clicked my nude photographs and also kept sexual relationship without my knowledge.” However, in her cross-examination, she deposed as under: staying in my “4. On 11.8.2023 I was blessed with a girl child. 1 in-laws house at village was Swainkhanda and carrying a pregnancy of six months. I gave birth to my daughter at Bhoomika Nursing Home, Jarka. The accused gave me Cold drinks as stated above in the month of January, 2023. At that time I was putting up at Bibekananda Working Women's Hostel near Kedar Gouri, Bhubaneswar. I was staying in that working women's hostel along with Madhusmita and another girl. There is a Police station near my working women's hostel. I have frequented my parental house as also my in-laws house. I invariably frequent my in-laws house every month from Bhubaneswar. Bari P.S. is hardly 7 kms from my in-laws house. I did not disclose before any members of my in-laws family or my parents in respect of the alleged incident during my visit thereto. I am a graduate. My elder sister (names her correctly) is working as Nurse at Panda Cancer hospital at Phulnakhara, Bhubaneswar. I visited my elder sister once. I used to talk with my elder sister over phone. I did not apprise my elder sister in respect of the alleged occurrence at any point of time prior to lodging of FIR. I invariably talk to my husband over phone. I never disclosed the alleged incident to my husband. I did not report the matter in any of the police stations prior to lodging of this FIR in respect of the alleged incident.” 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the F.I.R. in the present case was registered on 28.01.2024 and eight months before the date of registration of the F.I.R., the prosecutrix alleged to have been subjected to sexual intercourse by petitioner on the pretext of providing her a job. The prosecutrix stated that she delivered a baby on 11.08.2023. If the evidence of the prosecutrix is believed, then she must be pregnant at the time of alleged incident. Apart from that the learned counsel for petitioner has taken me to the medical evidence, which reads as under: “No bodily intercourse injury suggesting forcible sexual No sign and symptoms suggesting recent sexual intercourse Blood group is B +ve Hymen is ruptured. Victim has been returned to Dept of Radiodiagnosis and Dept. of FMT of DHH, Jajpur for determination of age. Samples including vaginal swab, pubic hair, Bail clippings, buccal swab, Blood has been collected, labeled, sealed and handed over to the escort party.” The evidence already came on record are not corroborating with the prosecutrix version, the prosecution story seems to be beyond comprehension. 8. Regard being had to the period of custody of the petitioner from 31.01.2024, since the prosecutrix has already been examined and the nature of accusation, I am inclined to admit the petitioner to bail. Hence, the petitioner 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 further conditions as following: (i) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation, (ii) He shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner whatsoever, (iii) He shall not contact with the victim or her family members, and (iv) He shall not involve in any similar type of offence. Violation of any conditions of bail shall entail consideration for cancellation of the bail granted to the petitioner. The prosecution is given liberty to move application for cancellation of bail before the Court below, if the petitioner violates any conditions of the bail granted to him. 9. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge amit Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: AMIT KUMAR MOHANTY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACKI Date: 16-Dec-2024 09:49:41