Orissa High Court
Surendra Kumar Barik vs State Of Orissa on 24 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLREV No. 517 of 2021
Surendra Kumar Barik .... Petitioner
Mr. Ashok Jena, Advocate
Versus
State of Orissa .... Opp. Party
Mr. P.C. Das, A.S.C.
CORAM:
JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
ORDER
Order No. 24.12.2021
01. I.A. No. 735 of 2021
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
This is an application for condonation of delay. The Stamp
Reporter has shown a delay of 2849 days in filing the Criminal
Revision.
It has been stated in the I.A. that the petitioner was on bail
during trial as well as during pendency of the appeal and the
dismissal of the appeal has not been intimated to the petitioner by
his counsel, for which he was unaware of the same and could not
file the criminal revision in time and NBW was issued and on
23.11.2021, the NBW of arrest was executed against him and he
became aware of the dismissal of the appeal.
Considering the said averments and the fact that the
petitioner is in custody, the delay of 2849 days in filing the
Criminal Revision is condoned, subject to deposit of Rs.1,000/- in
the Orissa High Court Bar Association Advocates' Welfare Fund.
// 2 //
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he will deposit the
said amount in course of the day and file the receipt.
The I.A. is accordingly disposed of.
.........................
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
CRLREV No. 517 of 2021
02. The case is taken up for fresh admission on prayer by the learned
counsel for the petitioner as the petitioner is in custody.
Heard.
Admit.
Issue notice.
Since Mr. P.C. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel accepts
notice on behalf of Opposite Party -State, one extra copy of the brief be
served on him within one week.
Call for the photocopy of the L.C.R.
List this matter on 25.03.2022.
.........................
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
I.A. No. 734 of 2021
03. Heard Mr. Ashok Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr. P.C. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.
This is an application for grant of bail.
The petitioner has been convicted under Section 16(1)(a)(i)
of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and sentenced to
undergo R.I. for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-,
in default to undergo R.I. for two months by the learned S.D.J.M.,
Angul in 2(C) C.C. No.205 of 1998 (Trial No.144 of 1998) which
was confirmed in appeal by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge,
// 3 //
Angul in Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 2007 by judgment dated
27.11.2013.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was on bail during trial as well as during pendency of the
appeal. He further submits that the petitioner was unaware of the
dismissal of the criminal appeal and on 23.11.2021 the NBW of
arrest issued against the petitioner was executed by the police and
on the same day he was produced before the learned trial Court he
deposited the fine amount but was remanded to jail custody and
now he is in custody. He files a certified copy of the order dated
23.11.2021 along with a memo and authentication fee of Rs.2.00
which is kept in the record.
Considering the above submission, it is directed that the
petitioner- Surendra Kumar Barik be released on bail to the
satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Angul in 2(C) C.C. No.205 of
1998 (Trial No.144 of 1998) during pendency of the Criminal
revision, on such terms and conditions as deemed fit and proper by
the learned trial Court.
The I.A. is disposed of.
.........................
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Later
04. CRLREV No.517 of 2021
Receipt of the High Court Bar Association in respect of
Rs.1000/- be kept in the record.
.........................
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Sukanta
