AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G. Satapathy, J.
Since these two bail applications arising out of one and same case record, the same are heard together and disposed of by this common order with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
These two bail applications are U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Jeypore Town PS Case No. 123 of 2023 corresponding to CT Case No.98 of 2023 pending in the file of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Koraput, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 302/34 of IPC, on the main allegation of committing murder of one Arun Anka by brutally assaulting him with different weapon of offence, along with co-accused persons in furtherance of their common intention.
In the course of hearing Mr. Lalatendu Samantaray, learned Sr. counsel who is being assisted by Mr. Jitendra Samantaray, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No.5835 of 2026 submits that although the petitioner is in custody is in custody since last three years and three months, but only 15 out of 29 charge-sheeted witnesses have been examined and material witnesses having already examined, there is hardly any scope for the petitioner to tamper with the prosecution evidence and thereby, by taking into account the pre-trial detention of the petitioner, he may kindly be granted bail.
Mr. Biraja Prasad Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner in BLAPL No.6465 of 2025 echoing the submission of Mr. Samantary, submits that not only the evidence of the material witnesses is shaky, but also there is hardly any evidence coming forward against the petitioner, who being innocent may be admitted to bail.
On the other hand, Mr. R.B. Mishra, learned Addl. PP by placing reliance on the evidence of the PWs.3, 5, 7, 9 & 13 prays to reject the bail applications of the petitioners.
No doubt, the petitioners are in custody since last three years, but the allegation against them is not only serious, but also grave and in the meantime, 15 witnesses have been examined, whose depositions have been filed, but threadbare analysis of the evidence is impermissible in a bail proceeding. In such situation and taking into account the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioners vis-à-vis the accusation sought to be brought against them and regard being had to the evidence of the witnesses so far examined, this Court does not feel it proper to grant bail to any of the petitioners at this stage.
Hence, the bail applications of the petitioners stand rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL Nos.5835 & 6465 of 2026 stand disposed of. Looking at the custody period of the petitioners, the petitioners may renew their prayer for bail before the learned trial Court, if the trial is not concluded within six months hence.
A soft copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the Court concerned.