SURATH CHANDRA GIN Vs. STATE OF ONISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for anticipatory bail. When the matter was listed for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he would not press the application since the learned Additional Sessions Judge has already directed release of the petitioner on anticipatory bail. When a certificate was given that the petitioner has not moved the Sessions Court, I felt that the circumstance under which the learned Additional sessions Judge allowed the prayer during pendency of an application in this Court should be probed into. Accordingly, I directed issue of notice to the petitioner to show cause why the bail granted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge shall not be cancelled. I directed on another date to issue notice to (i) Madhusudan Tripathy (ii) Mahendra Chandra Protihari and (iii) Jitendra Kumar Choudhury, who were released on bail by this Court to show-cause why the bail granted shall not be cancelled. I also directed issue of notice to (i) Gopal Chandra Bank (ii) Siba Charatl Naik (iii) Akuli Charan Patra and (iv) Maheswar Sahu to show cause why the anticipatory bail granted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge shall not be cancelled. Although notices were served since October, 1987, the matter was not listed till 16-4-1988.

(2.) There are three categories of accused persons whose release on bail is subject matter of consideration. (i) Accused Madhusudan, Mahendra and Jitendra who were released on bail by this Court after their arrest in course of investigation; (ii) Accused, Gopal, Siba, Akuli and Maheswar who have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge; and (iii) Petitioner, who applied for anticipatory bail both in the Sessions Court and in this Court, having been granted anticipatory bail does not want to press this petition.

(3.) Inspector of Police, C.I.D. (Crimes) lodged a written report in Mangalabag Police Station which was registered as Mangalabag Police-Station case No. 187 of 1987. On receipt of the First Information Report, CR. Case No. 991 of 1987 has been registered in the Court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Cuttack, Madhusudan Tripathy, Mahendra Chandra Protihari and Jitendra Kumar Choudhury were arrested and produced. Bail having been refused, they moved this Court for bail which has been granted on 27.5.1987 in the applications registered as Criminal Misc. Case Nos. 431, 436 and 448 of 1987. Since the orders in all the three applications are similar, the order passed in Criminal Misc. Case No. 431 of 1987 relating to Madhusudan Tripathy is quoted below: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Patra for the State. Some documents have been seized from the petitioner which prima facie show his involvement in the crime, Mr. Patra submits that the investigation is in progress and many more materials are likely to come out against the petitioner. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case so far placed, I think it appropriate to release the petitioner on bail for Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the S.D.J.M. Cuttack subject to the further condition that the petitioner shall make himself available for investigation as and when required by the 1.0. and shall not do any not which would obstruct or in any way retard the investigation to be made. The bail so granted is liable to be cancelled if it is found that the petitioner has interfered with the investigation in any manner whatsoever and/or if any other materials are available against justifying cancellation of bail. Certified copy of this order be granted today if applied for.