NIRANJAN SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This the second journey of the petitioner to this Court seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438, Cr.P.C. in connection with Nayagarh Sadar P.S. Case No. 32 of 2009 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 393 of 2009 pending on the file of learned S.D.J.M., Nayagarh for alleged commission of offences under Sections 341/294/323/324/ 325/307/379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Earlier the petitioner and Anr. co-accused, namely, Sanjaya Sahoo filed application in this Court for anticipatory bail in BLAPL No. 12849 of 2009 in connection with the very same Nayagarh Sadar P.S. Case No. 32 of 2009. In the said bail application, the present petitioner figures as petitioner No. 1 Upon hearing, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed order in that bail application on 28.08.2009 granting anticipatory bail to co-accused-Sanjaya Sahoo, but rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail of the present petitioner. The relevant portion of the said order in so far as it relates to the present petitioner is quoted hereunder:

(3.) In view of the rejection of the earlier anticipatory bail application of this petitioner, as above, the learned Additional Government Advocate raised objection about the maintainability of this second anticipatory bail application. Learned Counsellor the petitioner, on the other hand, contended, relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of Bimal Lochan Das v. State of Orissa,2007 37 OCR 688 that the principle of res judicata is not applicable to bail application and, therefore, there is no bar for filing successive anticipatory bail applications.