Back
S. K. SAHOO
Pradeep Sethi @ Pradeep Kumar Sethi @ Lipu – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
JUDGMENT
S.K. Sahoo, J. - This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Video Conferencing/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
3. This is an application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Khaira P.S. Case No.93 of 2021 corresponding to Special Case No.109 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Special Court), Balasore for offences punishable under sections 341/376(2)(l)/376(2)(n)/506 of the Indian Penal Code and section 6 of the POCSO Act.
4. The petitioner moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, (FTSC), Balasore which was rejected on 25.07.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 18.04.2021 and his first bail application in BLAPL No.5094 of 2021 was rejected as per the order dated 23.12.2021 taking into account, inter alia, the 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim, however, liberty was granted to him to renew the prayer for bail after examination of the victim in the trial Court. It is submitted that in the meantime, trial has commenced and as many as seve
The court may grant interim bail considering the period of detention, absence of chance of tampering with evidence or absconding, and the progress of the trial, even if not inclined to release the pe....
The court may grant interim bail considering the slow progress of trial, the petitioner's compliance with earlier interim bail order, and the period of detention in judicial custody.
The court may grant interim bail considering the period of detention and slow progress of the trial, even if not inclined to grant bail on merit.
The court considered the nature of evidence, period of detention, absence of criminal antecedents, and change in circumstances as key factors in reconsidering the bail application.
Point of Law; Nature of accusation, the 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim and taking into account the period of detention of the petitioner in judicial custody bail granted.
The court considered the progress of the trial and the period of detention in judicial custody as factors in granting bail.
The court ruled bail should be granted when trial delays infringe on the right to personal liberty, provided conditions to prevent tampering with evidence are set.
The court has the discretion to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. based on the totality of the facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
The court considered the circumstances of the case, including the nature of the offense, the petitioner's time in custody, and the expected trial duration, in granting bail.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
