AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Savitri Ratho, J
1.This is the second application of the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with Nilagiri P.S. Case No.181 of 2023 corresponding to C.T. Case No.275 of 2023, in the file of the learned S.D.J.M., Nilagiri where chargesheet dated 26.09.2023 has been filed against the petitioner for commission of offences under Sections 323, 307, 328, 506/34 of IPC. In the meanwhile, the case has been committed and is pending in the Court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge – cum- P.O., OPID, Balasore in S.T. Case No.65/555 of 2023.
BLAPL No.10578 of 2023 filed by the petitioner earlier has been rejected by me on 04.10.2023.
Thereafter, the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected on 17.01.2024 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge – cum-P.O., OPID, Balasore.
The prosecution allegation in brief is that the petitioner was married the informant before one year of the incident and one girl child has been born to them. The informant was staying at parental house at Nilgiri for better treatment of the girl child. On 29.05.2023, the petitioner came to his in-laws house and while others were busy injected poison into the baby girl for which her condition became serious. Although she was shifted to D.H.H., Balasore and thereafter to SCB, Cuttack for better treatment, she expired. The informant saw the petitioner throwing the vital gold bottle and syringe out of the window.
Mr.Basu, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 31.05.2023 and as investigation has been completed and the case has been committed, there is no question of the petitioner tampering with the evidence which is a change in circumstance. He further submits that there is no direct material against the petitioner connecting him with the death of the child and the child has died almost one month after the occurrence. There is nothing in the post-mortem report to indicate that the death is on account of being injected with the substance which the petitioner is alleged to have thrown outside the window.
Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioner and the materials collected against him by the police, I am not inclined to release him on bail.
Liberty is granted to the petitioner to move for bail afresh if there is undue delay in completion of the trial or after examination of the material witnesses.
With the aforesaid observations, the BLAPL is dismissed.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
……………………………