AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Savitri Ratho, J
This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner in connection with Puruna Katak P.S. Case No. 189 of 2023 corresponding to C.T. Case No. 323 of 2023 pending in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Harabhanga (Charichhak) registered for commission of offence punishable under Section 379/34 of IPC.
The prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 10.01.2024 passed in BLAPL No. 107 of 2023 by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Boudh.
The prosecution allegation in brief is that on 08.12.2023, the Section-in-charge Electrical ESO, Purunakatak reported that the 11 KV Supervisor had reported that some unknown culprits had committed theft of Transformer core of 10 KVA of Kalimati village Sub-station.He submitted that the approximate cost of the Transformer core would be Rs.40,000/-. Some co-accused persons were arrested during investigation and the statement of the co-accused Prabin Pradhan @ Prabina recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, Transformer core had been recovered.
Mr. Pulakesh Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 16.12.2023 in this case and although he had no criminal antecedents, after he was arrested in this case, the Police has entangled him in 9 other cases of similar nature. He further submits that as investigation has considerably progressed and as the Transformer core has been recovered, the prayer for bail of the petitioner may be sympathetically considered. He also submits that co-accused Prabin Pradhan @ Prabina has been granted bail in BLAPL No. 349 of 2024 on 19.01.2024 by this Court.
Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned Additional Government Advocate opposes the prayer for bail stating that the petitioner and the co-accused Prabin Pradhan @ Prabina have formed a gang and have been committing similar offences (stealing of Transformer core which he has led to power cuts in the area) and considering the fact that the present petitioner has 9 criminal antecedents of similar nature and as investigation is in progress, he should not be released on bail. He further submits that the prayer for bail of the co-accused had been allowed on submission of the counsel that he has no criminal antecedents.
Considering the submission of the learned counsel, the number and nature of criminal antecedents of the petitioner and as investigation is in progress, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail at this stage.
The BLAPL is accordingly dismissed.
It is open to the petitioner to move the learned trial court for bail afresh after completion of investigation.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
…………………………