Back
Bail Amid Blows: Orissa HC Grants Relief in Deadly Assault Case, Schooling Magistrate on Bail Basics
In a swift oral judgment delivered on , Justice G. Satapathy of the allowed bail for petitioners Adikanda Swain and another in a culpable homicide case, while issuing a pointed advisory to the for bungling the law on co-accused releases. The ruling underscores strict limits on using notices under for serious crimes.
From Fists and Rods to Courtroom Battle
The case stems from Case No. 1130 of 2025, registered as GR Case No. 1875 of 2025 before the SDJM, Bhanjanagar in Ganjam district. Petitioners stand accused under . Allegations paint a grim picture: the petitioners allegedly assaulted the deceased with fists, kicks, and an attempted rod attack, leading to the victim's death in hospital.
Investigation wrapped up with a , and taken. Section 105 BNS carries life imprisonment or 5-10 years, making it and without safeguards. Co-accused Radhamohan Swain, Madan Swain, and Sujata Bisoyi had already secured bail from the SDJM—sparking this High Court plea under .
Petitioners Push Back, State Stands Firm
Advocate K.P. Dash for the petitioners highlighted the lower court's prior bail to co-accused in identical charges, urging parity. He stressed completed investigation, filing, and lack of flight risk.
Additional Public Prosecutor C. Mahanty for the countered on the offence's gravity—life-term potential under Section 105 BNS—but the court noted no dispute on facts, focusing instead on procedural lapses below.
Unpacking the Legal Knot: BNSS Barriers and Magistrate Misstep
Justice Satapathy dissected BNSS provisions meticulously. allows magistrate bail for offences, but bars it for life-imprisonment risks without reasons or provisos (e.g., for minors, women, sick). The SDJM granted co-accused bail merely citing Section 35(3) BNSS notices—meant only for cognizable offences punishable under 7 years.
As echoed in recent Orissa High Court clarifications, Section 35(3) notices target lighter offences:
"punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years."
Police and magistrate erred here, ignoring Section 105 BNS's heft. The High Court admitted petitioners to bail without merits comment, balancing "nature and gravity" against record materials.
Key Observations
"there appears allegation against the Petitioners for assaulting the deceased by giving fist and kick blows as well as trying to assault with a rod, but the deceased subsequently succumbed to the injuries"
"notice as contemplated U/S. 35(3) of the BNSS is meant for cognizable offences punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years whether with or without fine"
"the learned SDJM, Bhanjanagar has granted bail to co-accused ... without recording any reason on the ground as stated in Sec.481(1)(i) of BNSS or on the ground as provided in proviso"
"this Court considers it proper to advise the learned SDJM, Bhanjanagar to go through the relevant provisions of the law while passing order in such a case ... this observation is made only to guide the young judicial Officer"
Gavel Falls: Bail with Strings, Warning Issued
Petitioners walk free on Rs. 25,000 bail bonds each with sureties, plus no-contact clauses for informant/witnesses. The court forwarded a copy to , for the SDJM—urging vigilance to uphold "."
This sets a precedent checkpoint for BNSS application in bail matters, potentially curbing hasty releases in grave cases and reinforcing procedural rigor for lower courts.
