RAMESH CHANDRA JENA v. STATE OF ODISHA
Court: High Court of Orissa
Bench: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Orissa judgment dated 2024-12-11. RAMESH CHANDRA JENA v. STATE OF ODISHA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ABLAPL No. 13852 of 2024 1) Ramesh Chandra Jena ..... Petitioners 2) Mousumi Jena @ Mili Represented By Adv. - 3) Sulagna Nayak @ Laki Jena Kuldeep Mohanty 4) Partha Sarathi Jena -versus- State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party Represented By Adv. – Mr. M. R. Mohanty, A. G. A. CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 11. 12. 2024 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/ Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the Opposite Party- State. 3. The present application has been filed under Section 482 of B. N. S. S. by the Petitioners seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Jaleswar P. S. Case No. 588 of 2024, corresponding to C. T. Case No. 740 of 2024, pending in the court of learned J. M. F. C. , Jaleswar, for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126, 296, 324(4), 329(3), 74,3(5) of BNS. 4.
It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Page 1 of 3. petitioners as well as informant group are neighbours. He further contended that due to a family rivalry, a scuffle took place between two groups. As a result of which both groups have sustained injuries. He further contended that there exists a case and counter case at the instance of both the parties. Further, referring to the present case, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that injury sustained by the injured are simple in nature. He further contended that the petitioners do not have any criminal antecedent and that they belong to the locality therefore there is no chance of their absconding. 5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand objected to the release of the petitioner on bail on the ground that the investigation is going on therefore, the release of the petitioners would cause delay in conclusion of the investigation. 6.
Considering the nature of allegation, gravity of offence and the surrounding facts of the case, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners. However, it is directed that in the event the Petitioners surrender before the Court in seisin over the matter within a period of four weeks from today and move an application for bail, the Court in seisin over the matter shall release them on bail in connection with the aforesaid case on such terms and conditions as it may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, but subject to verification of similar criminal antecedent of the Petitioners and injury report. In the event it is found by the learned court below that the Petitioners are having any similar criminal antecedent or the injuries sustained by the injured are grievous in nature, then this order shall automatically stand Page 2 of 3. revoked. 7. Accordingly, the ABLAPL is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge Rubi Page 3 of 3. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RUBI BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 13-Dec-2024 10:34:30
Source: High Court of Orissa. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.