IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.1824 of 2025 Mohan Charan Sahani @ … Petitioner Mohani Mr. D. Das, Advocate -versus-

State of Orissa … Opposite Party Mr. M.R. Patra, Addl. PP CORAM:

JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

ORDER(ORAL)

Order No. 11.12.2025

01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

2. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Kujang PS Case No.440 of 2023 corresponding to CT Case No.32 of 2024 pending in the file of learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Kujang for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.302 of IPC, on the main allegation of committing murder of the deceased Siba Charan Sahani by piercing through a pointed bamboo stick.

3. In the course of hearing Mr. Debasnan Das, learned counsel for the petitioner by taking this Court through the evidence of sole eye witness-cum-PW.3 submits that she has although stated in examination chief about the occurrence, but in her cross-examination, she has admitted to have not seen the occurrence and therefore, the sole testimony of the eye witnesses having been demolished by the defence and the petitioner having been detained in custody for substantial period, may kindly be granted bail.

Mr. Das, further, alternatively submits that even if the materials on record are taken into consideration, since the incident happening on a spur of moment, no offence U/S.302 can be attributed to the petitioner, rather he can be attributed for offence U/S.304 Part-II of IPC and the petitioner having detained in custody for around three years may kindly be granted bail.

3.1. On the other hand, Mr. M.R. Patra, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, however, strongly opposes the bail application of the petitioner by contending inter alia that not only the case is based on eye witnesses account, but also on the basis of oral dying declaration of the deceased and therefore, the trial having already progressed to a substantial extent, the bail application of the petitioner may kindly be rejected.

4. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears some allegation against the petitioner for piercing a pointed bamboo stick to the body of the deceased near his collar bone area resulting in his death, but it is well settled that appreciation of evidence is not in the domain of the Court considering the bail application, and detail analysis of evidence and meticulous examination of document on merit should be avoided at the stage of consideration of bail. It is no doubt true that the eye witness has stated in the cross-examination on recall that she has not seen occurrence, but she has vividly described the incident in the examination in chief. Further, other witnesses have also stated about the oral dying declaration of the deceased before them. In such view of the matter and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioner and keeping in view the trial being going on and taking into account the law laid down by Apex Court in X Vrs. State of Rajasthan (2024) SCC Online SC 3539, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected.

6. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

(G. Satapathy)

Judge Jayakrushna Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: JAYAKRUSHNA DASH Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 12-Dec-2025 13:05:39