Orissa High Court
Pintu @ Sushanta Kumar vs State Of Odisha on 8 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No. 465 of 2019
Pintu @ Sushanta Kumar .... Petitioner
Mahanta
L. Bhuyan, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opp. Party
Mr. P.B. Tripathy, A.S.C
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No.
08.04.2021
I.A. No.704 of 2020
06. 1. This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode.
2. This is an application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C.
for grant of bail.
3. Heard.
4. The appellant-petitioner has been convicted under
section 6 of the POCSO Act read with section 376(2)(i) of
the Indian Penal Code and section 3(1)(xii) of SC and S.T.
(POA) Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of
ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.25000/- (rupees twenty
five thousand) and in default, to undergo R.I. for one year
for the offence under section 6 of the POCSO Act and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of six months and
to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (rupees one thousand) and in
// 2 //
default, to undergo R.I. for one month for the offence
under section 3(1)(xii) of SC and ST (POA) Act and no
separate punishment was awarded under section 376(2)(i)
of the Indian Penal Code. Further in view of the provision
of section 42 of the POCSO Act. All the sentences were
directed to run concurrently by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, Keonjhar in Special
Case No.184/66 of 2016-14.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that
the petitioner is in judicial custody since 09.08.2014 and
out of ten years of substantive sentence, he has already
undergone substantive sentence of six years and seven
months and there is no chance of early hearing of the
appeal in the near future and the balance of convenience
lies in his favour and therefore, the bail application may be
favourably considered. He placed the evidence of the
doctor (P.W.5) who has stated that though there was no
complete penetration but there was an attempt for the
same and intercourse in between the thigh closed to
genitalia cannot be ruled out. The doctor found no other
bodily injury on the person of the victim except genital
injuries and on genital examination, the hymen was found
to be intact with redness and tenderness. He further
submitted that in view of the available material on record,
the bail application of the appellant may be favourably
considered.
6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand
opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim
was aged about four years at the time of occurrence and
she has categorically stated how the petitioner touched
and pressed his private part on her private part. Learned
counsel for the State also pointed out from the judgment
// 3 //
where the finding in the chemical examination report has
been discussed and it was found that stains of semen of
the appellant were found on the chadi of the victim.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties, the nature of evidence
available on record, the nature and gravity of the
accusation, the manner in which the offence was
committed on the victim by the appellant and particularly
the age of the victim, I am not inclined to release the
appellant on bail.
The I.A. stands dismissed.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
CRLA No.465 of 2019
07. As the petitioner is in judicial custody since
09.08.2014, the registry shall prepare the required
number of paper books and then the matter be listed for
hearing in the week commencing from 28.06.2021.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
P
