The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 12427 of 2023 Jagannath Pradhan ..…... Petitioner -Versus- Mr. B.R. Das, Adv. State of Odisha …… Opposite Party Mr. Sonak Mishra, ASC CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
Decision
ORDER 07.03.2024 Order No. 02. Dated FIR No. Police Station 261 23.09.2020 Golanthara Dist.Ganjam Sections Section 498(A)/302/201/3 4 of IPC Case No. and Court’s name S.T. No.26 of 2021 pending in the court of 3rd learned Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Cuttack Date: 07-Mar-2024 19:23:21 counsel for the State. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned 2 3. The Petitioner being in custody in connection with Golanthara P.S. Case No.261 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. No.26 of 2021 pending in the court of learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur for the offences under Sections 498(A)/302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code has filed this application for release on bail. 4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that Informant lodged an FIR alleging therein that her daughter got married to the present Petitioner about twelve years ago. The daughter of the Informant was not leading a happily marital life but she was blessed with two sons. The in-law’s family of her daughter has completely severed all relationship with them. On 21.09.2020 at 7:00 PM, the brother-in-law of her daughter informed her over phone that her daughter died and they had cremated. Hence, the Informant suspected her in-law’s family members to have killed her and burnet her body. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is in custody since 28.09.2020. He further submits that out of twenty charge sheeted witnesses, only three witnesses have been examined and the trial is not likely to be completed in near future. Hence, the Petitioner seeks for Signature Not Verified bail. Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Cuttack Date: 07-Mar-2024 19:23:21 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that right to have speedy 3 trial is a fundamental right of a citizen. Hence, keeping a person in custody for such a long time without any trial is not justified and violative of his fundamental right. The importance of speedy trial has been emphasized in the case of Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. vs Home Secretary, State of Bihar, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has iterated that: "Speedy trial is, as held by us in our earlier judgment ingredient of dated 26th February, 1979, an essential 'reasonable, fair and just" procedure guaranteed by Article 21 and it is the constitutional obligation of the State to device such a procedure as would ensure speedy trial to the accused. The State cannot be permitted to deny the constitutional right of speedy trial to the accused on the ground that the State has no adequate financial resources to incur the necessary expenditure needed for improving the administrative and judicial apparatus with a view to ensuring speedy trial." 7. He further argues that the period of long incarceration suffered, which entitle the Petitioner for grant of bail. Right to Speedy trial is a fundamental right of an under trial prisoner and this observations have been resonated, time and again, in several judgments including that of Kadra Pahadiya & Ors. v. State of Bihar 1wherein it has been held that the obligation of the State or the complainant, as the case may be, to proceed with the case with reasonable promptitude. Particularly, in a country like ours, where the large majority of the accused come from poorer and weaker Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Cuttack Date: 07-Mar-2024 19:23:21 1 (1981) 3 SCC 671 4 sections of the society and are not versed with laws and after face the dearth of competent legal advice. Of course, in a given case, if an accused demands speedy trial and yet he is not given one, may be a relevant factor in his favour. But an accused cannot be disentitled from complaining of infringement of his right to speedy trial on the ground that he did not ask for or insist upon a speedy trial. 8. The Supreme Court has also held in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi)2 that incarceration has further deleterious effects where the accused belongs to the weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the event of an acquittal, the loss to the accused is irreparable), and ensure that trials - especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily. 9. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the Petitioner. 10. Considering the submissions made, facts and Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Cuttack Date: 07-Mar-2024 19:23:21 circumstances of the case as well as period of detention of the Petitioner in custody for about three years, it is directed 2 SLP (Crl.) No.915 of 2023 5 that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case with some stringent terms and conditions as deemed just and proper by the learned court in seisin over the matter with further conditions that:- i. the Petitioner shall appear before the local police station once in a week on Monday in between 10 A.M. to 1.00 PM. ii. the petitioner shall appear before the learned trial court on each date of posting of the case; iii. he shall not indulge himself in any criminal offence while on bail and iv. he shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution evidence in any manner. 11. Violation of any of the conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail. 12. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of. Judge ( Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: P.A. Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Cuttack Date: 07-Mar-2024 19:23:21 Murmu