The court may grant bail if a petitioner has been in custody for an extended period and lacks evidence of interference with trial proceedings, balancing the seriousness of charges against the potential for trial security.

Judgment :

A.C. Behera, J.

1. This bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 filed by the petitioner arising out of Spl. G.R. Case No.4 of 2024 in connection with Cuttack Sadar P.S. Case No.16 of 2024 pending in the Court of learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, F.T.S.C.-II, Cuttack is taken up into consideration.

2. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and the learned counsel for the informant.

3. The petitioner is facing trial in the Court of learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, F.T.S.C.-II, Cuttack in Spl. G.R. Case No.4 of 2024 arising out of Cuttack Sadar P.S. Case No.16 of 2024 remaining in the jail custody since 29.01.2024 as an under trial prisoner having been charged under Section 292 -A, 212, 376(2)(n) of the IPC , 1860, Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Sections 66 -E, 67-A & 67-B of the I.T. Act, 2000 along with his other co-accused persons on the allegations alleged against him that, due to the frequent talking between the petitioner and the victim since the month of May, 2022, they loved each other and the petitioner proposed the victim for marriage. Thereafter, in the months of August and November, 2023, the petitioner took the victim by his motorcycle to the OYO Hotel on three different dates and made sexual intercourse with her in a room of that hotel in each occasion and took the naked/nude photographs of the victim inside the room of that hotel through his mobile phone and sent the said nude/naked photographs to the mobile phone of the victim through whatsapp and the said nude photographs of the victim were in her mobile phone, to which, she (victim) had not disclosed before any of her family members including her parents. Thereafter, there was disturbance between the victim and the petitioner, for which, the victim stopped her talking with the petitioner. So, the petitioner made the nude photographs of the victim viral. Thereafter, on dated 07.01.2024, she (victim) lodged F.I.R. against the petitioner at Sadar police station, Cuttack, alleging the aforesaid allegations.

4. Basing upon such F.I.R, a case was registered and investigation was started. During investigation, the petitioner was arrested and forwarded to the Court on dated 29.01.2024 after being booked with the aforesaid offences and since, then, he (petitioner) is in jail custody.

During investigation, the other co-accused persons of the petitioner were also arrested and forwarded to the Court.

After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted on dated 07.03.2024 and then trial of the case, vide Spl. G.R. Case No.4 of 2024 was started against the petitioner and his co-accused persons.

5. As per the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Advocate and the learned counsel for the informant/victim that, except the petitioner, his co-accused persons are on bail and as he (petitioner) is the principal culprit, he is in jail. During trial, till yet, altogether seven numbers of witnesses including the victim/informant and her father have already been examined out of 46 numbers of charge-sheeted witnesses.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted for liberal consideration of bail of the petitioner contending that, he (petitioner) is in jail custody for about more than 10 months and during his staying inside the jail, the examination of the victim and her father has already been completed before the Trial Court and he (petitioner) shall not interfere with the evidence of the prosecution in any manner, in case of his release on bail, to which, the learned Additional Government Advocate and learned counse