SUDEI Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are challenging the order dtd. 22/1/2019 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Pipili in G.R. Case No.221 of 2018 whereby the cognizance for the offences U/Ss.341/323/294/324/307/506/34 IPC has been taken against the petitioners.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the present petition to raise all the points before the Court below at the appropriate stage. However, he further submits that initially the present petitioners were granted concession of pre-arrest bail at the stage of investigation, benefit of that bail order should continue till the conclusion of the trial.

(3.) In the initial F.I.R., the offence under Sec. 307 IPC was not invoked. However, after the investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the petitioners for various offences including the offence under Sec. 307 IPC. Therefore, they apprehend that once they appear before the Court below, they may be sent to judicial custody. The apprehension of the petitioner are uncalled for in view of the ratio laid down in the cases of Sushila Agarwal and others vs. State of (NCT of Delhi) and another reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1 and Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51.