Orissa High Court
Somanath Nayak vs State Of Odisha on 21 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No. 745 of 2021
Somanath Nayak .... Appellant
Mr. S.R. Mohapatra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent
Mr. A. Das, Addl. Govt. Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No.
21.12.2021
01 The matter is taken up through Video
Conferencing.
Learned counsel for the State submitted
that he has received copies of the appeal memo
along with impugned judgment and interim order.
Heard.
Admit.
Call for the Trial Court Record.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No.1349 of 2021
02. The matter is taken up through Video
Conferencing.
// 2 //
This is an application under section 389 of
Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
Heard.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner though faced trial under sections 376-
AB/376(2)(n) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code read
with section 6 of the POCSO Act but he has acquitted
of the charges under section 376-AB, 376 (2)(n) and
506 of the Indian Penal Code so also under section 6
of the POCSO Act but he has been guilty under
section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and section 8 of
the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for
three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees
five thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for six
months more for the offence under section 354 of
the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for three years and six
months and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- (rupees five
thousand), in default, to undergo R.I. for a further
period of six months for the offence under section 8
of the POCSO Act and both the sentences were
directed to run concurrently by the learned Ad hoc
Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC, Kendrapara in G.R.
Case No. 76 of 2018.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner was taken into judicial custody in
connection with this case on 28.10.2018 and since
then he is in judicial custody. He further submitted
// 3 //
that out of three years and six months of substantive
sentence imposed by the learned trial Court, he has
already undergone substantive sentence of more than
three years and one month and therefore, the bail
application of the petitioner may be favourably
considered.
Learned counsel for the State submitted that no
material has been produced by the petitioner to
substantiate that the petitioner was in judicial custody
since 28.10.2018.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel
for the respective parties, the substantive sentence
imposed by the learned trial Court and sentence
stated to have already undergone by the petitioner in
judicial custody, I am inclined to release the petitioner
on bail.
For the aforesaid period, let the appellant-
petitioner be released on interim bail for the aforesaid
period 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 Court in
seisin over the matter with further terms and
conditions as the learned Court may deem just and
proper.
Before accepting the bail bond, the learned trial
Court shall verify the case record and if it is found
// 4 //
that the petitioner is in judicial custody since
28.10.2018, the bail bond shall be accepted.
The I.A. is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
I.A. No. 1350 of 2021
03. Heard.
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.
The I.A. is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per
rules.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
P
