RATIKRISHNA NANDA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED of rape and other offences punishable under Sections 376, 323 and 448 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code in G.N. Case No. 1325 of 1982 in the Court of the Sub -divisional Judicial Magistrate, Panposh, Udit nagar, the Petitioner, who is said to be a student of the Engineering College at Rourkela, seeks his release on bail. The Petitioner and the co -accused Pradipta Kumar Naik had earlier moved this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 527 of 1982 for their release on bail. At the stage of hearing of that case, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners did not press the application in respect of the present Petitioner and accordingly the application was rejected in respect of the Petitioner. The learned Standing Counsel had no objection to the other Petitioner namely, Pradipta Kumar Naik, being released on bail. After hearing the learned Counsel for both the sides, the application was allowed in respect or of the co -accused Pradipta Kumar. The Petitioner has again come to this Court under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) MRS . A.K. Padhi, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, has invited my attention to the contents of the first information report and the other materials gathered by the investigating agency and has submitted that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the Petitioner is guilty of the offence of rape - a non -bailable offence punishable with imprisonment for life - and in addition, in the recent floods at Banki in the district of Cuttack, the family members of the Petitioner have been affected and the Petitioner's assistance is absolutely necessary. Mr. Indrajit Ray, the learned Standing Counsel has submitted that on the completion of investigation, a charge -sheet has already been submitted and he has no objection to the release of the Petitioner on bail.

(3.) THE overriding considerations in granting bail are the nature and gravity of the circumstances in which the offence is committed; the position and status of the accused with reference to the victim and the witnesses; the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice; of repeating the offences; of jeopardising his own life being faced with a grim prospect of possible conviction in the case; the history of the case as well as of its investigation; of tampering with witnesses and other relevant grounds which, in view of so many variable factors, cannot exhaustively set out. See Gurcharan Singh and Ors. v. State (Delhi Administration), A.I.R. 1978 S.C. 179 . As observed by V.R. Krishna Iyer, J. in Gudikanti Narasimhulu and Ors. v. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh : A.I.R. 1978 S.C. 429. "Bail or jail -, at the pre -trial or post -conviction stage belongs to the blurred area of the criminal justice system and largely hinges on the hunch of the Bench, otherwise called judicial discretion.