Shibani Barik vs State Of Odisha

Case Name: Shibani Barik vs The State Of Odisha

Case Citation: 2020 BLAPL NO. 915 of 2020

Case Parties:

Relevant Acts and Sections:

The allegation against the petitioner is that she along with the co-accused (Upendra Mahananda) have caused direct and indirect mental torture on the deceased (Padmalochan Barik) which resulted in him committing suicide. The accused married the deceased on 21.02.2019 but prior to that the accused was in a love relationship with the co-accused that continued after the marriage and the co-accused had sent some of her intimate tik-tok videos to the deceased which also streamed online. The shame and betrayal caused by watching the videos made him suffer mentally which resulted in him committing suicide by hanging himself from the ceiling fan of his bedroom.

From the initial investigation, it was evident that the co-accused is responsible for the abetment of suicide. However, whether or not the petitioner has any role in it is not clear. More information and evidence need to be gathered in order to reach a conclusion. Based on this the petitioner requested bail.

The petitioner argued that the petitioner has no role in the death of the deceased. A part of her past life came up and resulted in horrible consequences. The cause of death was suicide but not yet established. Statements recorded of some of the family members and neighbours disclosed that the video did play a role in Padmalochan's death but none pointed out that the petitioner had any motive or role in the death of her husband. The petitioner got arrested on 14.01.2020 and since is in jail. Hence, she may be granted bail.

The respondent opposed the bail request stating that the petitioner plays a role in the abetment of suicide of her husband. The investigation is ongoing and based on the seriousness of the case the bail should not be granted. It is a non-bailable offence and trial is yet to start so this granting of bail may skid the trial process.

Further investigation might bring in more evidence but currently, the role of the co-accused is more evident considering he prepared the videos and shared, published, and sent them to the deceased. The petitioner was already kept in custody for a considerable period to make sure that she does not tamper with witnesses and any evidence. The role of the petitioner is not completely ruled out but more evidence is required to reach a conclusion. Invoking Section 306 would be absurd.
Hence, the petitioner deserves the benefit of bail. The accused is expected to stand trial when called upon. Considering all the matters and perspectives the Court reached the conclusion that the petitioner shall get released on bail with the imposition of certain terms and conditions laid down by the Court as seems fit and the liberty should not be misused. The Court made it clear that trial will proceed fairly uninfluenced by any of the observations made hereinabove. Hence, the present bail application was granted.

For a simpler understanding, refer to the article " How to Tackle Cyber Bullying?” by clicking the button below.

Related Posts