IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.1321 of 2023
1. Premraj Podh
2. Magsir Podh Appellants
….
Mr. H.S. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & another Respondents
….
Mr.Rajesh Tripathy,
Addl. Standing Counsel
Mr. S.K. Dwibedi, Advocate (for
respondent no.2.)
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No.
31.01.2024
03. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement
(video conferencing/physical mode).
Learned counsel for the State submitted that notice
on the informant has been made sufficient.
None appears for the informant.
Heard Mr. H.S. Mishra, learned counsel for the
appellants and learned counsel for the State.
This is an appeal under section 14-A of S.C. & S.T.
(PoA) Act, 1989 in connection with Special G.R. Case
No.49 of 2023 arising out of Balangir Sadar P.S. Case
No.279 of 2023 pending in the Court of learned
Presiding Officer, Excl. Special Court, SC & ST (PoA) Act,
Bolangir for offences punishable under section 302/34 of
the Indian Penal Code read with section 3(2)(v) of the S.C.
// 2 //
& S.T. (PoA) Act.
The appellants moved an application for bail before
the Court of learned Presiding Officer, Excl. Special Court,
SC & ST (PoA) Act, Bolangir, which was rejected on
24.11.2023.
Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that
the appellants are in judicial custody in connection with
this case since 23.07.2023 and they have been charge
sheeted under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code
read with section 3(2)(v) of the S.C. & S.T. (PoA) Act. He
further submits that the eye witness account indicates
that it was the deceased who was an aggressor and he
assaulted appellant no.1 Premraj Podh and then broke
open the front glass of his auto rickshaw and due to such
overt-act committed by the deceased, the occurrence has
taken place. It is further submitted that both the
appellants assaulted the deceased by
means of a ‘lathi’
urrounding
and ‘merha’ and taking into account the s
circumstances, it cannot be said that the ingredients of
the offence under section 302 of the I.P.C. are made out.
Learned counsel further submits that the appellants have
got no criminal antecedents and even if it is stated that
prima facie case is made out on the basis of the
statements of the eye witnesses, but in absence of any
materials that there is any chance of absconding or
tampering with the evidence, the bail application may be
favourably considered.
Learned counsel for the State placed the statements
of the eye witnesses, particularly the statement of Jublal
Page 2 of 4
// 3 //
Naik and further placed the post mortem report, which
indicates that the cause of death of the deceased was on
account of cranio cerebral injury. Learned counsel for the
State further submits that the weapon of offence seized
was sent to the doctor, who conducted post mortem
examination and he opined that the injuries sustained by
the deceased were possible by such weapon. However, he
submits on verification of case records that the appellants
have got no criminal antecedent.
Learned counsel for the informant opposes the
prayer for bail and submitted that whether the case would
come within the purview and scope of right of private
defence or not or the exception as provided under section
300 of I.P.C. is attracted, is to be adjudicated during trial.
He further submits that the manner in which the
appellants have taken the law into their own hand and the
overt-act committed by them as well as the post mortem
report findings, bail should not be granted to the
appellants.
Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, the nature of
accusation against the appellants, the surrounding
circumstances under which the offences are alleged to
have been committed, absence of any criminal
antecedents against any of the appellants and further
taking into account the period of detention of the
appellants in judicial custody, I am inclined to release the
appellants on bail.
Page 3 of 4
// 4 //
Let the appellants be released on bail in the
aforesaid case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/-
(rupees fifty thousand) each with two local solvent
sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the
learned Court in seisin over the matter with further
conditions as the learned Court may deem just and proper
with further conditions that they shall appear before the
learned trial Court on each date to which the case would
be posted for trial and shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence.
Violation of any of the conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail.
The CRLA is accordingly disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order on proper
application.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
PKSahoo
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: PRAMOD KUMAR SAHOO
Designation: Secretary
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Date: 01-Feb-2024 12:08:33
Page 4 of 4