High CourtsSingle Bench(2024) 01 OHC CK 0064

Sankar Munda vs State Of Orissa

Orissa High Court · Decided on 9 January 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Savitri Ratho, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 27 Of 2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 315 words

Savitri Ratho, J

1.

This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner in connection with Champua P.S. case No.160 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 374 of 2023 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Champua which has been registered under Section 380 of the IPC.

2.

The prayer for bail of the petitioner and co-accused Bipin Munda has been rejected by order dated 19.12.2023 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Champua.

3.

The prosecution case in brief is that on the night of the 06/07.10.2023 some unknown persons had committed theft of three mobile phones, one laptop and cash of Rs.2,000/- by entering the house of the informant. After searching for the articles, the informant lodged FIR in the Champua Police station. During investigation some mobile phones were recovered from the accused persons and petitioner along with others were arrested and forwarded to the Court.

4.

Mr. Zafarulla learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a young man. He is in jail custody since 05.12.2023 and is being exposed to hardened criminals in jail. Considering the fact that investigation has progressed considerably, his prayer for bail may be sympathetically considered.

5.

Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, learned Additional Standing Counsel opposes the bail stating that the investigation is still in progress and some of the stolen articles including laptop are yet to be recovered and the criminal antecedents of the petitioner have to be verified.

6.

Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioner and the fact that investigation is in progress, I am not inclined to entertain the prayer for bail at this stage. The BLAPL is accordingly dismissed.

7.

It is open to the petitioner to move for bail afresh after completion of the investigation.

8.

Urgent certified copy of the order be granted on proper application.

………………………………