AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V. Narasingh, J
Since both the matters arise out of Itamati P.S. Case No.303 of 2022, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order on the consent of the parties.
Heard learned advocates for the Petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
The Petitioners are accused in G.R. Case No.891 of 2022 pending on the file of learned S.D.J.M., Nayagarh, arising out of Itamati P.S. Case No.303 of 2022 for commission of the alleged offence under Sections 294/341/307/302/506/323/109/34 IPC and Sections 25(1-B)(a)/27 of the Arms Act.
Being aggrieved by the rejection of their application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nayagarh, by order dated 5.5.2023 in the aforementioned cases, the present bail applications have been filed.
It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioners are in custody since 21.12.2022 and as charge sheet has been filed on 16. 4.2023, further continuance of the Petitioners in custody is not warranted keeping in view the genesis of the offence.
The background in which the offence is stated to have been committed has been detailed in the statement of the eye witness one Rabindra Kumar Nayak, who has been cited as C.W.3.
On perusal of the said statement, it is seen that the villagers of the deceased were the aggressors and during the fight the deceased took out the fire arm and tried to open fire and it is on record that one Basudev Nayak the co-accused snatched the same from the deceased and fired at him repeatedly to which he ultimately succumbed.
In view of the background in which the offence has been committed, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that since the gun shot is attributed to one Basudev Nayak and he is not the Petitioner before this Court, they may be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail on the ground that there are materials on record to indicate, relying on the very statement of P.W.3, that the present Petitioners had attacked the deceased with billhook. He has also relied on the statement of one Prasanna Kumar Pradhan (C.W.2) to fortify his submission regarding complicity of the present Petitioners.
Perused the post-mortem report of the deceased which indicates that the deceased suffered 7 gunshot injuries and the cause of death is due to severe hemorrhage and injuries to vital organs like heart and lungs which can be attributed to the bullets which were fired at him.
Considering the gunshot injuries to which the deceased succumbed are attributed to the co-accused Basudev Nayak and the recovery of the weapon of offence at the instance of the co-accused Nibashi Nayak who are not the Petitioners in these BLAPLs, this Court directs the Petitioners to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin.
Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioners shall appear before the jurisdictional police station once a month on such date and time to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin till conclusion of trial. Certification of such appearance shall be submitted to the Court in seisin.
Liberty is given to the prosecution to seek variance of this order in the event there is any threat perception.
It is made clear that so far as complicity of other co-accused are concerned the same shall be dealt with on the basis of their complicity in an independent manner.
Both the bail applications stand disposed of accordingly.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per the rules.
………………………