The court denied bail based on the severity of charges, substantial connections to the crime through witness identification, and the petitioners' serious criminal histories.

JUDGMENT :

G. Satapathy, J.

1. Since these three bail applications arise out of one and same case record, the same are taken up together and disposed of by this common order with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. These are applications U/S.483 BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Plantsite PS Case No.335 of 2021 arising out of ST No.64/16 of 2022, pending in the Court of learned 2^nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Rourkela for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.147/ 148/ 307/ 341/ 323/ 326/ 506/ 302/ 120-B/ 149 of IPC r/w Sec.25/27 of ARMS ACT , on the allegation of firing at the informant and his brother and assaulting the brother of the informant by sharp cutting weapons along with co- accused persons causing death to the brother of the informant.

3. In the course of hearing, Mr. Devashis Panda, learned counsel for the petitioners in BLAPL Nos.11344 & 12737 of 2024 submits that although the petitioners are identified in TI parade by PW16, but PW16 having admitted in cross-examination about seeing the photo of the petitioners prior to the TI parade, no sanctity can be attached to such TI parade report and eye witnesses like PWs.13 and 15 having not supported the prosecution case and the petitioner Aamir Khan being the informant in the case of murder of his brother in which the deceased was an accused along with PW14, the evidence of PW14 cannot be believed to detain the petitioners further in custody in this case. It is also submitted by Mr.Panda that the petitioner Aamir Khan was released on interim bail for some period, but he has never misused the concession so granted to him and he being still continuing with the ailment may kindly be granted bail. It is also submitted by Mr. Panda that the petitioner Aamir Khan was in fact taken into hospital today for his ailment of varicose veins and there is no material or evidence against the petitioners, but they are in confinement and, therefore, the petitioners may kindly be granted bail.

3.1. Mr. Amlan Shakti Paul, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No.5761 of 2024 in echoing the submission as advanced by Mr. Panda prays to grant bail to the petitioners.

3.2. In reply, Mr. P. Satpathy, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor by producing relevant documents submits that the petitioner-Aamir Khan although claims to have not misused the liberty so granted to him in the form of interim bail, but he had mislead the Court in obtaining extension of his interim bail. It is further submitted by Mr. Satpathy that appreciation of evidence at the stage of bail should be avoided, but it cannot be ruled out that the petitioners have been identified in TI parade, so also by the eye witnesses who have implicated them for the murder of the deceased. Mr. Satpathy further submits that the petitioners are having serious criminal antecedents and, therefore, release of the petitioners at this stage would facilitate them to influence the trial. Accordingly, Mr. Satpathy under the aforesaid submission prays to reject the bail applications of the petitioners.

4. A careful scrutiny of the materials placed on record, it is found that the petitioners are charged for murder of one Jitendra Kumar Saha, but the petitioners seek bail on the pleas that the evidence of the materials witnesses so far as examined who are PW.13 to 16 do not corroborate the prosecution allegation, but it is neither advisable nor acceptable to appreciate the evidence at the stage of consideration of bail