AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G. Satapathy, J.
This is the bail application U/S.483 of the BNSS by the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Balasore Sadar P.S. Case No.394 of 2026 arising out of C.T. Case No. 747 of 2026 pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C. (City), Balasore for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. 311/249(b)/111(5)/61(2) BNS read with Section 25/27 Arms Act, on the allegation of entering into conspiracy with co-accused persons to commit dacoity in the Bank and taking away money there from.
In the course of hearing, Mr. Amulya Ratna Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only allegation appearing against the petitioner is for harbouring the co-accused, but he has no direct nexus with the commission of crime and the offence alleged against the petitioner being prima facie a bailable offence, the petitioner may kindly be granted bail. On being queried about the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, Mr. Panda volunteers to withhold bail to the petitioner, if he is found to have any criminal antecedent for commission of property offence.
On the other hand, Mr. S.N. Biswal, learned Addl. PP in opposing such prayer of the petitioner submits that there are ample materials on record to show that the petitioner is involved in conspiracy with the co-accused persons and thereby, it cannot be said that the petitioner is liable for a bailable offence. Mr. Biswal accordingly prays to reject the bail application of the petitioner.
After having considered the rival submissions and upon perusal of record, no doubt the petitioner has been detained in custody, but the impugned order of rejection of bail to the petitioner reveals inter alia the following:-
“xx xx xx Accused Bapi Molla @ Akiyabul Haque and Jahan Ali Molla were arrested along with the petitioner. Allegation against accused, Bapi Molla @ Akiyabul Haque and Jahan Ali Molla is that they committed the robbery, whereas the allegation against the petitioner is that he had harboured the robbers in his house and that he had shown various jewellery shops and Banks to them and that he had also shown Rasalpur Grameen Branch where the crime was committed. So, apparently the petitioner took part in the conspiracy with the actual robbers. xx xx xx”
In view of the aforesaid observation and on consideration of materials placed on record and keeping in view the pre-trial detention of the petitioner in custody since 03.08.2026 and the claim as advanced for the petitioner for not having any criminal antecedents, this Court without expressing any view on merit, admits the petitioner to bail, but subject to verification his criminal antecedent for commission of property offence.
Hence, the bail application of the Petitioner stands allowed and the Petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court in seisin of the case on such terms and conditions except cash surety as deem fit and proper by it.
In view of the specific submission as advanced for the petitioner, the benefit of this order shall not be extended to the petitioner, if he is found to have any criminal antecedent for commission of property offence without leave of the Court.
Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules. A soft copy of this order be immediately communicated to the concerned Court, who shall afterwards communicate the same to the concerned Jail through e-mail for reference.