DEBENDRA KUMAR PATTNAYAK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Head learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Sisir Das, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State.

(2.) Petitioner No. 1, the father-in-law of the informant, is aged about 65 years, petitioner No. 2, the mother-in-law of the informant is aged 55 years and petitioner No. 3, the sister-in-law of the informant is only 20 years old. Out of the three accused persons, two are ladies. Their bail application has been rejected by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Khurda in Cri.M.C. No. 273 of 2002 by order dated 16.-5-2002 on the ground that crimes of the present nature are rising alarmingly in the society and that investigation of the case is still in progress and it would be premature at this stage to release the petitioners on bail.

(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the records, I feel that as two of the accused persons are ladies and petitioner No. 1 is an old man and the charges against them are under Sections 498-A/34 IPC read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, ends of justice will be better served if the petitioners are released on bail 1 of Rs. 15,000/- (fifteen thousand) with two sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the S.D.J.M., Khurda in G.R.Case No. 324 of 2002, corresponding to Tangi P.S. Case No. 68 of 2002 with condition that the petitioners shall not interfere with the investigation and shall not tamper with the evidence.