Orissa High Court
Subasini Bhanja vs State Of Odisha on 8 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No. 141 of 2021
Subasini Bhanja .... Appellant/
Petitioner
Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent/
Opp. Party
Mr. P.K. Mohanty, Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No.
08.04.2021
02. 1. Defect nos.5(e) and 9 as pointed out by the Stamp
Reporter stands ignored.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.260 of 2021
03. 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
sections 498-A/304-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and
section 4 of the D.P. Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for
// 2 //
two years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- (rupees three
thousand), in default, to undergo further R.I. for three
months for the offence under section 498-A/34 of the Indian
Penal Code and R.I. for seven years for the offence under
section 304-B/34 of the Indian Penal and R.I. for one year
and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- (rupees three thousand), in
default, to undergo further R.I. for two months for the
offence under section 4 of the D.P. Act by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Aska in Sessions Trial Case No.40
of 2013.
5. Perused the impugned judgment.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner, who is the mother-in-law of the deceased, is an
aged lady and she was on bail during trial of the case and
she has never misutilised her liberty. He further submitted
that there is absolutely no material on record that the
deceased died an unnatural death and even though the
doctor conducting post mortem examination, reserved the
final opinion relating to the cause of death awaiting the
receipt of the viscera report and no chemical examination
report was produced but the learned trial Court basing on the
inquest report observation held the cause to be a death on
account of poisoning. He further submitted that the evidence
is not at all clinching against the petitioner to make out an
offence under section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and
the petitioner has good chance of success in the appeal and
there is no chance of early hearing of appeal in the near
future and balance of convenience is in favour of the
petitioner and therefore, the bail application of the petitioner
may be favourably considered.
// 3 //
7. Learned counsel for the State placed the relevant parts
of the impugned judgment. He submitted that there are
materials on record to show that the deceased was subjected
to physical and mental torture in connection with demand of
dowry.
8. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the
respective parties, the nature of evidence adduced by the
prosecution during trial, the sentence imposed by the learned
trial Court, the period already undergone by the petitioner
and the fact that the petitioner was on bail during trial and
there is no allegation of misutilization of her liberty while on
bail and keeping in view the proviso to section 437(1) of
Cr.P.C. and absence of any chance of early hearing of the
appeal in the near future, the prayer for bail is allowed.
9. Let the appellant-petitioner be released on bail pending
disposal of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/-
(rupees fifty thousand) with two local solvent sureties each
for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial
Court.
10. The I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.261 of 2021
04. 1. Heard.
2. There shall be stay of realization of fine amount
imposed by the learned trial Court on the appellant-petitioner
till disposal of the criminal appeal.
// 4 //
3. The I.A. is disposed of.
4. As the restrictions due to the COVID-19 situation are
continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a soft
copy of this order available in the High Court's website or
print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner
prescribed, vide Court's Notice No.4587, dated 25th March,
2020.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
RKM
