Karan Joshi vs State Of Orissa

G. Satapathy, J.

This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Khetrajpur PS Case No.214 of 2025 corresponding to ST Case No.352/80 of 2025 pending in the file of learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Sambalpur, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.103(1)/238/ 3(5) of BNS, on the main allegation of committing murder of Babu @ Chatani Yadav by assaulting him with deadly weapons, along with co-accused person in furtherance of their common intention.

In the course of hearing, Mr. Bijaya Kumar Ragada, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely no direct evidence available against the petitioner, but the so called circumstances of last seen theory, leading to recovery of weapon and extra judicial confession of the petitioner do not incriminate him specifically and, thereby, such circumstances cannot be used against the petitioner at this stage of consideration of bail, but the petitioner is in custody since last one year and, therefore, the petitioner may kindly be granted bail.

On the other hand, Mr. M.R. Patra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, however, strongly opposes such submission advanced for the petitioner by contending inter-alia that not only the petitioner has been implicated in this case with reliable circumstances, but also his implication is on the basis of extra judicial confession made by him before the witnesses Arjun Joshi, Sananda Rohidas and Paban Satnami and that apart, the deceased was being last seen with the petitioner by the said witness Paban Satnami and, therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may kindly be rejected.

After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, there appears allegation against the petitioner for committing murder of the deceased, but at this stage of consideration of bail, detail and meticulous analysis of materials/evidence on record is not permissible, however, the petitioner’s implication is on the basis of alleged last seen theory, recovery of weapon at his instance and extra judicial confession made by him before witnesses. The allegation against the petitioner is not only grave, but also serious and the punishment prescribed for offence of murder is life or death in case of conviction. Besides, there also materials to indicate about prior enmity between the deceased and the petitioner for a quarrel between them in which the deceased had allegedly kicked the petitioner and demanded Rs.10,000/-. In the aforesaid premises and on consideration of materials placed on record and taking into account the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioner vis-‡-vis the accusations sought to be brought against him, this Court does not consider it proper to grant bail to the petitioner, especially at this stage when the trial is yet to commence and material witnesses are yet to be examined.

Hence, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.

In view of the alternative oral prayer as advanced for the petitioner, trial be expedited, if there is no other legal impediment. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the learned Court in seisin over the matter.