Back
2021 Supreme(Ori) 476
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
S.K. Panigrahi, J.
Sk. Hugula @ Hagura @ Wazid - Appellant
Versus
State Of Odisha & Anr. - Respondents
CRLA No. 5 of 2021
Decided On : 07-07-2021
Mr. Deepak Kumar Sahoo, Advocate, for the Appellant;Mr. Sk. Zafrulla, Additional Standing Counsel, Mr. Gagan Bihari Singh, for the Informant, for the Respondent.
Granting bail based on lack of material evidence and the possibility of a fallacious case due to previous disputes.
Headnote:
Bail - Criminal Appeal - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The appellant challenged the order denying bail in a case involving charges of attempted rape and assault on a cancer patient. The appellant claimed innocence and cited lack of material evidence against him.
Finding of the Court:
The court, considering the submissions and circumstances, granted bail to the appellant with stringent terms and conditions.
Issues: The main issue was the appellant's eligibility for bail in a case involving serious charges.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the appellant deserved bail based on the lack of material evidence and the possibility of a fallacious case due to previous disputes.
Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal was allowed, and the appellant was granted bail with strict terms and conditions.
ORDER
1. This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the informant and learned counsel for the State.
3. The appellant has preferred this Criminal Appeal challenging the order dated 02.12.2020 passed by the learned Special Judge-cum-Sessions Judge, Kendrapara in T.R. Case No. 17 of 2020 arising out of Rajnagar P.S. Case No. 46 of 2020, registered under Sections 307, 376, 511/34 of IPC and section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(v) of the SC & ST Act, has filed the present appeal.
4. The brief fact of the case is that the informant is suffering from cancer. On 19.02.2020, she decided to offer prayers in the village temple at night with the belief that she will be cured. At that time the appellant and other co-accused persons arrived at the premises and dragged her with an intent to rape her. When the informant tried to protest, they tried to strangle her. She somehow escaped and fled to her house.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is blameless and has been implicated merely based on doubt, previous enmity, and the confessional statement of co-accused before the police while in custody. That apart, there is no material evidence available on-record against the appellant. The appellant and the informant are closely associated and they belong to the same village. This fallacious case has been filed only due to some previous dispute between them. The chargesheet has been filed but the ingredients of the offences have not been satisfied. Yet, the appellant is in custody since 21.2.2020.
6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail of the appellant.
7. Considering the submissions made, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the appellant deserves to be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the appellant stands allowed.
8. Hence, the appellant be released on bail in the aforesaid case by the court in seisin over the matter on some stringent terms and conditions as deemed just and proper with further conditions that:-
i. the appellant shall appear before the learned trial court on each date posting of the case;
ii. he shall not threaten or coerce the informant in any manner and
iii. he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.
9. Violation of any of the aforesaid conditions may entail consideration for cancelation of the bail granted to the appellant.
10. Accordingly, the CRLA stands allowed.
11. As the Lock-down period is continuing for COVID-19, learned counsel for the parties may utilize the soft copy of this order available in the High Court's website or print out thereof at par with certified copies in the manner prescribed, vide Court's Notice No. 4798 dated 15th April, 2021.
