The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 12976 of 2023 An application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. -------------- Soumya Ranjan Singh ..…. Petitioner -versus- State of Odisha …… Opp. Party ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner
Legal Reasoning
Mr.Anshuman Nanda, Advocate : For Opp. Party ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. D.K. Mishra, AGA : CORAM: HONOURABLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO JUDGMENT 16.01.2024 Savitri Ratho, J. This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Hirakud P.S. Case No.85 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.259 of 2023, pending in the file of the learned J.M.F.C.-1 (Cog.Taking), Sambalpur registered under Sections 427,376,493,417,420 of IPC on 10.04.2023 against the petitioner after the complaint (in 1.C.C Case No 5 of 2023) was sent to the Police Station under Section – 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. Final form BLAPL No. 12976 of 2023 Page 1 of 6 dated 02.10.2023 has been filed against the petitioner for commission of offences punishable under Sections – 427,376,493,417 and 420 of the I.P.C. 2. The prayer for bail of the petitioner had been rejected vide order dated 03.11.2023 passed by the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Sambalpur in BL AP No. 1350-306 of 2023. 3. The prosecution case in brief is that the complainant was in love with the petitioner since of the year 2018 and the petitioner was on visiting terms to her house since then. On 19.02.2023 at about 10.00 a.m., the petitioner went to the house of the complainant and told her they should get married in Samaleswari Temple on the same day. But the petitioner took the complainant towards Right Dike, Burla and committed rape on her against her wishes and thereafter assured to marry her. On the same day at 2.00 p.m., the petitioner took the complainant to Saiphoon near 18000, Burla made the complainant believe that she is his married wife and kept physical relation with her. Thereafter he told her that his parents would go to her house. On 26.02.2023, he spent some intimate moments with and took photographs of their activities. When she asked him to fix the date of marriage, he avoided to fix BLAPL No. 12976 of 2023 Page 2 of 6 the date of marriage and asked her to wait for six months. When she and her parents went to the Hirakud Police Station on 27.02.2023 to report the matter, the police asked her to settle the matter amicably. As the police did not register any FIR, the petitioner consulted a lawyer on 09.03.2023 and thereafter, filed the complaint on 28.03.2023. The complaint has been sent to the I.I.C., Hirakud Police Station, pursuant to order passed under Section 156(3) of IPC by the learned J.M.F.C-I, Sambalpur and the Sambalpur P.S. case No. 85 of 2023 was registered on 10.04.2023 against the petitioner for commission of offences punishable under Section 427,376,493,417,420 of IPC. 4. I have heard Mr.Anshuman Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner appearing from the Virtual High Court at Sambalpur and Mr.D.K.Mishra, learned Addl. Government Advocate and perused the case diary. 5. Mr. A. Nanda, learned counsel appearing from the Virtual High Court at Sambalpur has submitted that the petitioner is a law abiding person and is in custody since 28.08.2023. False allegations have been made against him that he raped the victim against her wishes and that he induced her to have physical relations with him BLAPL No. 12976 of 2023 Page 3 of 6 promising to marry her and giving her the impression of marriage . He has also submitted that no injury was found on any part of the body of the victim- informant and the no mark of injury was found on the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner and the victim are both adults and from the statement of the victim it is apparent that they were in a consensual relationship and were supposed to marry. When the petitioner did not agree to marry the complainant, she has made false allegation against him. The ingredients of the offences under Section 376 (2) (n) IPC and Section 493 of the I.P.C are not satisfied for which the offences are not made out against the petitioner and the other offences alleged against him are triable by a Magistrate. He further submits that as investigation has been completed in the meanwhile, he may be released on bail. 6. Mr. D.K.Mishra, learned Addl. Government Advocate opposed the prayer for bail stating that the offences alleged against the petitioner is heinous in nature and he has spoilt the life of the victim. As the petitioner has enjoyed a physical relationship with the victim after giving her the false assurance of marriage and also false impression of marriage and thereafter avoided to marry her, he BLAPL No. 12976 of 2023 Page 4 of 6 does not deserve to be granted bail. He also submits that if such a person is released on bail, it will send a wrong message to the society and encourage unscrupulous people to spoil the lives of young girls. 7. The narration in the complaint and the statement of the victim reveal that she was in love with the petitioner since a number of years and they have had physical relations on at least two different occasions. The petitioner had assured to marry her after the first incident and on the same day giving her the impression that she is his wife had relations with her again. Statements of witnesses reveal that the petitioner and the victim were in love with each other and the petitioner used to go to her house, but since he broke his promise to marry her, she had lodged FIR against him. A few witnesses have also stated that the victim had lodged FIR against the petitioner on 14.02.2022 and after the petitioner was granted bail by the High Court on 20.05.2022, he had told the victim that his family members wanted her to marry him and they should live together. But she insisted that he should marry her and till then they should only speak over the phone. Thereafter the subsequent events have taken place. BLAPL No. 12976 of 2023 Page 5 of 6 8. Keeping in mind the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of Deepak Gulati vs State of Haryana : (2013) 7 SCC 675 and Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs State of Maharashtra and another : (2019) 9 SCC 608, and considering the nature of allegations against the petitioner, the age of the victim and as investigation has been completed in the meanwhile, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. 9. The petitioner - Soumya Ranjan Singh, shall be released on bail by the learned Court in seisin over the matter, on such terms and conditions as deemed fit and proper by it after verifying that he has no criminal antecedents of similar nature. 10. The BL APL is accordingly allowed. 11. Observations in this order have been made for the purpose of consideration of the prayer for bail and should not influence the learned trial court. 12. Urgent certified copy of the order be granted on proper application. ……………………… (Savitri Ratho, J.) Orissa High Court, Cuttack. The 16th of January 2024, B.N.Sahoo , P.A. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BICHITRANANDA SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 22-Jan-2024 21:13:30 BLAPL No. 12976 of 2023 Page 6 of 6