PURNA CHANDRA NAG Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since these four bail applications arise out of one and same case record, the same are heard together and disposed of by this common order with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) These are the bail applications U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with ST Case No.64 of 2023,ST Case No.122 of 2023, ST Case No.122 of 2023 & ST Case No.181 of 2023 corresponding to GR Case No.103-F of 2011, GR Case No.103-H of 2011, GR Case No.103-H of 2011 & GR Case No.103-I of 2011 respectively which arise out of Titilagarh PS Case No.37 of 2011 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Sambalpur, for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.147/ 148/ 341/ 325/ 302/ 436/ 114/ 120-B/ 149 of IPC r/w Sec. 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, on the main allegation of rioting, along with co-accused persons being armed with deadly weapons by forming an unlawful assembly and attacking the deceased and setting fire to the Bolero vehicle in which the deceased was sitting by pouring petrol and thereby, causing death of the deceased Radhe Shyam Rai, the then DGM of Powmex Steel Plant, Titilagarh.

(3.) In the course of hearing, Mr. Basanta Kumar Das, learned counsel appearing for all the petitioners submits that out of 52 accused persons, 35 co-accused have faced the trial, but only one was found convicted and that too, the said convict was admitted to bail by this Court, which was confirmed in Apex Court. It is further submitted that another co-accused Basanta Kumar Sahoo, who has been granted bail by this Court, but the order granting bail of such co-accused has been unsuccessfully challenged by the informant before the Apex Court. It is further submitted by Mr. Das that the accused persons have faced the trial and remained in custody for more than two years and in the meantime, the vital witness namely Alok Kumar Nayak having already been examined in the trial has not substantially supported the prosecution allegation against the petitioners and he was accordingly found to have not been able to identify any of the accused persons including co-accused Madan Jal and Mahatab Kharsel, who are stated to be prime accused in this case and, therefore, the petitioners being the innocent persons and having detained in custody for a substantial period, may kindly be granted bail.