Child In Conflict With Law Gets Bail After 3 Yrs Custody; Orissa High Court Raps Police For 'Lackadaisical Attitude'

"Proceedings of the High Court cannot be held hostage to the whims of the investigating agency and for their lackadaisical attitude, rights of an accused cannot be marginalized, needs no emphasis."

Factual Background:

The petitioner is an accused under Sections 450/307/302/34/120-B of IPC and was in custody since 08.12.2018. Being aggrieved by the rejection of her bail application on 23^rd July 2019 by the Additional Session Judge-Cum-Special Judge POCSO Act, Bargarh, she filed the present bail application.

By an order dated 24.06.2021, the High Court took note that the petitioner is a Child in Conflict with Law. Thereafter, it had specifically directed for obtaining report regarding her conduct and also for production of Case Diary. However, the matter suffered another adjournment on 03.11.2021.

On 12^th May 2022, when the matter was called for hearing, a prayer was made on behalf of the State for adjournment to produce the Case Diary. The Court perused the records available with the office of the Advocate General. Then, it came to light that by letter dated 24/28.06.2021 the IIC Bijepur District Bargarh was informed to produce the up-to-date Case Diary. Since the same was not responded to, another letter dated 06.11.2021 was addressed to Superintendent of Police Bargarh and IIC Bijepur in the District Bargarh. However, to the utter disappointment, the case diary was not made available to the Court.

Court's Observations:

Having noted the aforesaid, the Court came down heavily on the police for its casual approach. It observed,

"It is indeed disconcerting that the concerned District police administration have scant regard for the orders passed by this Court and have chosen to disregard repeated communication from the office of the Advocate General for submission of Case Diary for which the Case has to suffer adjournments."

The Court hoped that necessary corrective action shall be taken so as to make the Police machinery more responsive to the needs of administration of justice.

Considering the age of the petitioner and the period of custody, the Court decided not to grant any further adjournment to the counsel for the State. After perusing the materials on record, it directed the petitioner to be released on bail on such terms to be fixed by the Court in seisin over the matter.

Further, it requested the Registry to send a copy of the order to Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Odisha, Director General of Police, Range DIG and the concerned Superintendent of Police for their knowledge and necessary action.

Case Title: Roshni Meher v. State of Odisha

Case No.: BLAPL No. 4649 of 2021

Order Dated: 12^th May 2021

Coram: Justice V. Narasingh

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. D.P. Pattanaik, Advocate

Counsel for the Respondent: Ms. S. Mishra, Additional Standing Counsel

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 68